The barriers to women's participation as subjects in biomedical research are currently being challenged as a matter of legislative policy, medicine, and law. This Article catalogs the ways in which women have been disadvantaged by their exclusion and recent developments to redress them, and goes on to dissect the underlying rationales for excluding women from clincial trials. The author reveals the ‘fundamental misconception’ behind exclusionary rationales, and argues that research sponsors in fact have more to fear in the way of potential liability from the exclusion of women, even pregnant women and women of child-bearing capacity, than from their inclusion. Finally, the Article suggests strategies for achieving reform of these exclusionary practices.

The recent and continual call for tort reform has many scholars proposing alternatives to current U.S. medical malpractice law. Most commentators limit their discussions to variations of the two Anglo Saxon theories of liability — negligence and strict liability. Little has been written examining the legal treatment of medical malpractice in other cultures. This article compares and contrasts Jewish and American medical malpractice law, examining both the contemporary and ancient sources of the law.

An announcement in July 1990 concerning the possible transmission of the Human Immunodeficiency Virus from an HIV-positive health care professional to a patient launched a public outcry for patient protection from acquiring HIV from health care professionals. As a result of numerous debates, Congress issued a mandate requiring the states to adopt the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's guidelines concerning HIV-positive health care professionals or an equivalent policy. This Note explores the regulations and guidelines established by various states in response to this mandate. The author concludes that policies requiring adherence to universal precautions within the health care setting, and not mandatory testing of health care professionals or mandatory disclosure of their HIV status, are best for protecting public health.

As health care reform pervades the United States, lawmakers have subjected physician self-referrals to heightened scrutiny. Recent evidence indicates that sending patients to facilities in which a physician has an ownership interest often causes overutilization, overpricing, and lower quality of care. This Note analyzes how physician self-referral arrangements can have negative effects on competition. To combat the adverse effects, the Note examines how enforcing antitrust laws can ameliorate the self-referral dilemma and aid in restoring competition to the health care market. This solution will maintain the doctor's right to invest while protecting the patient's vulnerability.