In this episode of the Diagnosing Health Care Podcast: On April 21, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled to preserve access to the prescription abortion drug mifepristone.
However, while the case continues in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, the future of mifepristone—and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s authority to approve new drugs—will continue to be debated on appeal.
Continue Reading Podcast: The Legal Battle Over Mifepristone – Diagnosing Health Care
In this episode of the Diagnosing Health Care Podcast: In the aftermath of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, important questions have emerged about the current legal and regulatory landscape surrounding patient access to drugs that have historically been used to induce abortions.
How can health care providers and pharmacies navigate these new restrictions?
Interest in and acceptance of telehealth services continues to grow. Recent events, like the COVID-19 pandemic and the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, have put more pressure than ever on federal and state legislators to promote access to telehealth services.
However, the greater use of telehealth services also increases the potential for fraudulent behavior and enforcement activity. Providers should continue to monitor developments in federal and state laws, regulations, and policies to capitalize on telehealth opportunities while staying compliant with applicable laws.
Since 2016, Epstein Becker Green has researched, compiled, and analyzed state-specific content relating to the regulatory requirements for professional mental/behavioral health practitioners and stakeholders seeking to provide telehealth-focused services. We are pleased to release our latest compilation of state telehealth laws, regulations, and policies within the mental/behavioral health practice disciplines.
Continue Reading Just Released: Telemental Health Laws – Download Our Complimentary Survey and App
The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to imminently issue its opinion in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (“Dobbs”). If the Court rules in a manner to overturn Roe v. Wade, states will have discretion in determining how to regulate abortion services.[1] Such a ruling would overturn nearly 50 years of precedent, leaving patients, reproductive health providers, health plans, pharmacies, and may other stakeholders to navigate a host of uncharted legal issues. Specifically, stakeholders will likely need to untangle the web of cross-state legal issues that may emerge.
Continue Reading The Pendulum Swings Both Ways: State Responses to Protect Reproductive Health Data, Post-Roe