In Defense of the Masses - An Interpretation of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act: In Re Baby K
Loading...
Authors
Epp, Pamela K.
Issue Date
1995
Volume
28
Issue
Type
Journal Article
Language
Keywords
Alternative Title
Abstract
INTRODUCTION|In 1986, the United States Congress passed the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act ("EMTALA") in an effort to prevent hospitals receiving Medicare funds from dumping indigent or uninsured patients. However, in drafting EMTALA itself, Congress used language that allows "any individual" who presents at a hospital emergency room to invoke the protection of EMTALA when a hospital refuses to screen or stabilize the individual's condition. The difference between EMTALA's legislative history and its plain language has sparked judicial debate as to the appropriate scope of EMTALA. Recently, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit addressed that very question in deciding In re Baby K ("Baby K'). Baby K involved a request by the Hospital for court permission to discontinue resuscitation of an anencephalic infant who periodically experienced respiratory distress as a result of her anencephalic condition and presented at the Hospital's emergency room in need of stabilizing treatment. The Hospital argued that such a refusal of treatment would not violate EMTALA because Baby K was not an "individual" as contemplated by the terms of EMTALA...
Description
Citation
28 Creighton L. Rev. 1209 (1994-1995)
Publisher
Creighton University School of Law