Gostin’s timely book offers the first systematic definition and theory of public health law. Basing his definition on a broad notion of the government’s inherent responsibility to advance the population’s health and well-being, he develops a rich understanding of the government’s fundamental powers and duties. By analyzing constitutional powers and limits, as well as statutory, administrative, and tort law, Public Health Law vividly shows how law can become a potent tool for the realization of a healthier and safer population.
Lawrence O. Gostin is Director of the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law and University Professor, Georgetown University’s highest academic rank. He directs the World Health Organization Center on National and Global Health Law and serves on the National Cancer Advisory Board.
Dense but interesting. It can be pretty heavy on the legalese, but I had to read it for class, so I think that made it more understandable. Also, just given how rapidly policy changes (especially in the current administration’s changes), some things are a bit out of date, but the book still helps to give a broader basis of policy.
Read for a Public Health Law course. Honestly one of the most enjoyable textbooks I've ever read. The text itself is interesting and the authors give very good examples to explain the presented concepts. Chapter 3 was a bit dry in my opinion but other than that, it was great.
Read for a Public Health Law class. For someone like me with a Public Health background and not a constitutional law background, this book is hard to digest. It caters more to current law students rather than public health students in my opinion. Nevertheless, it's informative and Gostin is one of the best in his field. Thankfully I had lectures to offset the density of this book.
This book was a little difficult to get through, especially considering I had zero legal background going into it, but I think it did a good job laying the groundwork for the legal realm of health and healthcare. It is a bit repetitive, but that was a benefit for me, since a lot of these issues are complex, abstract, and ambiguous.
Not a bad overview, but it was repetitive and I don't feel like it added that much to my understanding of the issues. I felt like it was mostly an explanation of administrative law and constitutional law and that I would have preferred to learn about more health policy specific issues.
Did a nice job of working in concise case descriptions and history while remaining readable to non-lawyers. I read this for a class but would recommend it to anyone interested in health policy or learning more about the legal aspects of government involvement in private decision making.