Recent Challenges to the So-Called "Contraceptive Mandate" to the Affordable Care Act
Location
Cleveland-Marshall College of Law
Start Date
7-3-2014 1:30 PM
End Date
7-3-2014 2:10 PM
Description
Link at above right is to mediasite video of this presentation. Professor DeBoer's presentation runs from 9:56 to 1:00:42. (For best results, view using the Firefox browser)
Professor DeBoer’s presentation will analyze the contraceptive mandate as a public health initiative that requires for-profit and nonprofit employers to cover certain preventive services in the interest of promoting public health. In performing this analysis, the presentation focuses on the assessment and the balancing of benefits and harms in the public policy underlying the mandate, noting especially the contrasting appraisals of benefits and harms offered by the proponents and the opponents of the mandate. Prof. DeBoer will argue in his presentation that the mandate is premised upon a public policy that fails in the assessment of harms, the assignment of too much weight to purported benefits, and the balancing of benefits and harms. He also contends that the mandate fails properly to regard the autonomy of individuals, for-profit business, and nonprofit organizations and imposes a substantial burden on their religious freedom and conscience.
Recent Challenges to the So-Called "Contraceptive Mandate" to the Affordable Care Act
Cleveland-Marshall College of Law
Link at above right is to mediasite video of this presentation. Professor DeBoer's presentation runs from 9:56 to 1:00:42. (For best results, view using the Firefox browser)
Professor DeBoer’s presentation will analyze the contraceptive mandate as a public health initiative that requires for-profit and nonprofit employers to cover certain preventive services in the interest of promoting public health. In performing this analysis, the presentation focuses on the assessment and the balancing of benefits and harms in the public policy underlying the mandate, noting especially the contrasting appraisals of benefits and harms offered by the proponents and the opponents of the mandate. Prof. DeBoer will argue in his presentation that the mandate is premised upon a public policy that fails in the assessment of harms, the assignment of too much weight to purported benefits, and the balancing of benefits and harms. He also contends that the mandate fails properly to regard the autonomy of individuals, for-profit business, and nonprofit organizations and imposes a substantial burden on their religious freedom and conscience.
Speaker Information
Michael J. DeBoer is Associate Professor of Law at the Thomas Goode Jones School of Law at Faulkner University. He holds a Juris Doctorate from Valparaiso University School of Law and a Master of Laws in health law, policy, and bioethics from Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law. He also holds graduate degrees in theology and has served as a law clerk to a federal judge and a state supreme court justice. He has taught health care law, public health law, administrative law, and other first-year and upper-level courses, and he writes primarily in the fields of health law and law and religion.