Public Health Advocacy in the Courts: Opportunities for Public Health Professionals

Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Public Health Reports (Impact Factor: 1.55). 11/2009; 124(6):889-94.
Source: PubMed
Download full-text


Available from: Shannon Frattaroli, Feb 05, 2014
  • Source
    • "The public health work of attorneys general, which has led to such important results as the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement, has not been studied by PHSSR or PHLR researchers (Jacobson and Wasserman 1999; Rutkow and Teret 2010). What Kromm and colleagues call “public health advocacy in the courts” encompasses a wide range of “actions by public health professionals that inform and affect how courts approach matters that affect the public's health legislative modes of policy development” (Kromm et al. 2009, 889). These include not only filing suits but also providing expertise as witnesses, submitting amicus briefs, educating the judiciary, influencing judicial selection, and monitoring and evaluating court outcomes, all of which can powerfully shape public health policy and practice (Parmet 2009) but have rarely been empirically studied. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: For three decades, experts have been stressing the importance of law to the effective operation of public health systems. Most recently, in a 2011 report, the Institute of Medicine recommended a review of state and local public health laws to ensure appropriate authority for public health agencies; adequate access to legal counsel for public health agencies; evaluations of the health effects and costs associated with legislation, regulations, and policies; and enhancement of research methods to assess the strength of evidence regarding the health effects of public policies. These recommendations, and the continued interest in law as a determinant of health system performance, speak to the need for integrating the emerging fields of Public Health Law Research (PHLR) and Public Health Systems and Services Research (PHSSR). Expert commentary. This article sets out a unified framework for the two fields and a shared research agenda built around three broad inquiries: (1) the structural role of law in shaping the organization, powers, prerogatives, duties, and limitations of public health agencies and thereby their functioning and ultimately their impact on public health ("infrastructure"); (2) the mechanisms through which public health system characteristics influence the implementation of interventional public health laws ("implementation"); and (3) the individual and system characteristics that influence the ability of public health systems and their community partners to develop and secure enactment of legal initiatives to advance public health ("innovation"). Research to date has laid a foundation of evidence, but progress requires better and more accessible data, a new generation of researchers comfortable in both law and health research, and more rigorous methods. The routine integration of law as a salient factor in broader PHSSR studies of public health system functioning and health outcomes will enhance the usefulness of research in supporting practice and the long-term improvement of system performance.
    Full-text · Article · Jun 2012 · Milbank Quarterly

  • No preview · Article · Mar 2011 · Injury Prevention
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Meaningful improvements in health require modifying the social determinants of health. As policies are often underlying causes of the living conditions that shape health, policy change becomes a health goal. This focus on policy has led to increasing interest in expanding the focus of community-based participatory research (CBPR) to change not only communities but also policies. To best realize this potential, the relationship between evidence and power in policy change must be more fully explored. Effective action to promote policies that improve population health requires a deeper understanding of the roles of scientific evidence and political power in bringing about policy change; the appropriate scales for policy change, from community to global; and the participatory processes that best acknowledge the interplay between power and evidence. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print November 14, 2013: e1-e4. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301471).
    No preview · Article · Nov 2013 · American Journal of Public Health
Show more