Health Law and Regulations

...

Analysis of the Impact of these Laws for Hospital and Clinic

The National Academy of State Health Policy also known as (NASHP), is an independent academy of state health policy makers that work together in order to identify emerging issues, develop policy solutions, and to improve the state policy and practice (Harris, 2007). There are several states that the regulation of healthcare facilities will vary according to the functions performed at the healthcare entities, as well as provide the organization structure for private sectors. Due to the recent influx of retail clinics across the U.S. will present a challenge with cost, access, and quality within the delivery system of health care. The legal doctrine that will prohibit any individual who is not licensed from interfering with or influencing the outcome of the providers’ professional judgment (Harris, 2007). There was also another doctrine that banned not-for-profit, and for-profit corporations from directly employing providers. The main intent was to ensure that nonprovider entities will not influence treatment decisions of the provider to retain responsibility for the practice of medicine (Jones, 2007). These corporate practices of medicine also known as (CPM) guidelines will vary from state to state.

Examples and Specific Cases

Legal ownership of retail clinics is a factor that will decide what states will regulate the facility. Retail clinics have been given various ownership details to conform to the regulatory structures of a given state (Jones, 2007). An example of legal ownership details the state of New Jersey; because this state forbids the corporate practice of medicine that also includes physicians prohibited from providing medical services to citizens. One operation recognized that they had to remove the retail clinic from under the corporate branch. Today, each retail clinic is operated and independently owned by a physician or a group. Even with the individualization there can be areas of concern for retail clinics. For example, CVS recently inducted its prescriptions Health Savings Pass program, and this allows the consumer to purchase their medication from any locations.

The Effect in Community

Health facilities and providers give the ability to monitor health care quality and patient safety. Regulatory changes made by the CMS have helped to shape the American Medical Association to remove the doctrines from the ethical codes (Harris, 2007). Because of the limitation on the research of the prohibition of CPM, the doctrine does not resemble determinative facts. The CPM prohibition restricts opportunities for the innovation of physician compensation and the delivery of health care. The evolution and involvement of the CPM prohibition over many years has resulted in a doctrine that lacks relevance and coherence in the landscape of today’s healthcare. There are many talks that the doctrine should be re-established.

Conclusion

Healthcare is a vital service that continues to drive the lives of millions of individuals. Regulatory agencies have the intention of helping to develop a healthy populations, however, can be viewed as the opposite in their objectives and goals. Regulations can be too restrictive and compromised in some instances hinder the delivery of effective medical care. With the assistance of regulations by the government, guidelines and policies are set in place to enforce the facilities to be held accountable for wrong actions. Regulations are extremely pertinent and vital within the healthcare environment. It is important as a healthcare provider that these regulations put into place be followed and ensure that quality is also the main focus.

References

Harris, D. (2007). Contemporary Issues in Healthcare Law and Ethics (3rd Ed.) Retrieved from

the University of Phoenix eBook Collection database.

Jones, J. W. (2007). Corporate medicine in 21st century health care. Retrieved from

http://www.physiciansnews.com/law/607jones.html.