Will EMTALA changes leave emergency patients dying on the hospital doorstep?

William M. McDonnell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Despite charges that it is at times ambiguous and overly burdensome, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) remains an important protection for patients, and a valuable instrument for enforcing public policy goals in the area of emergency healthcare services. The 250 Yard Rule is a small but crucial part of EMTALA, extending the statute's protections to emergency patients who have narrowly failed to reach the hospital's entrance. Following recent revisions to EMTALA's implementing regulations, some health-care law practitioners and senior federal regulators have opined that enforcement of the 250 Yard Rule will be dramatically curtailed. This Article explores the legal and public policy origins of the 250 Yard Rule and their continuing applicability in the current regulatory environment. The Article concludes that the regulatory basis for the 250 Yard Rule remains intact and that the legislative intent behind EMTALA, as well as ongoing public policy goals, dictate that the 250 Yard Rule be preserved.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)77-93
Number of pages17
JournalJournal of health law
Volume38
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 1 2005

Fingerprint

Emergency Treatment
Public Policy
Emergencies
Delivery of Health Care

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Will EMTALA changes leave emergency patients dying on the hospital doorstep? / McDonnell, William M.

In: Journal of health law, Vol. 38, No. 1, 01.01.2005, p. 77-93.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

McDonnell, William M. / Will EMTALA changes leave emergency patients dying on the hospital doorstep?. In: Journal of health law. 2005 ; Vol. 38, No. 1. pp. 77-93.
@article{2cc0700c18f84770a5dd7be575e76aca,
title = "Will EMTALA changes leave emergency patients dying on the hospital doorstep?",
abstract = "Despite charges that it is at times ambiguous and overly burdensome, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) remains an important protection for patients, and a valuable instrument for enforcing public policy goals in the area of emergency healthcare services. The 250 Yard Rule is a small but crucial part of EMTALA, extending the statute's protections to emergency patients who have narrowly failed to reach the hospital's entrance. Following recent revisions to EMTALA's implementing regulations, some health-care law practitioners and senior federal regulators have opined that enforcement of the 250 Yard Rule will be dramatically curtailed. This Article explores the legal and public policy origins of the 250 Yard Rule and their continuing applicability in the current regulatory environment. The Article concludes that the regulatory basis for the 250 Yard Rule remains intact and that the legislative intent behind EMTALA, as well as ongoing public policy goals, dictate that the 250 Yard Rule be preserved.",
author = "McDonnell, {William M.}",
year = "2005",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "38",
pages = "77--93",
journal = "Journal of health law",
issn = "1526-2472",
publisher = "American Health Lawyers Association",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Will EMTALA changes leave emergency patients dying on the hospital doorstep?

AU - McDonnell, William M.

PY - 2005/1/1

Y1 - 2005/1/1

N2 - Despite charges that it is at times ambiguous and overly burdensome, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) remains an important protection for patients, and a valuable instrument for enforcing public policy goals in the area of emergency healthcare services. The 250 Yard Rule is a small but crucial part of EMTALA, extending the statute's protections to emergency patients who have narrowly failed to reach the hospital's entrance. Following recent revisions to EMTALA's implementing regulations, some health-care law practitioners and senior federal regulators have opined that enforcement of the 250 Yard Rule will be dramatically curtailed. This Article explores the legal and public policy origins of the 250 Yard Rule and their continuing applicability in the current regulatory environment. The Article concludes that the regulatory basis for the 250 Yard Rule remains intact and that the legislative intent behind EMTALA, as well as ongoing public policy goals, dictate that the 250 Yard Rule be preserved.

AB - Despite charges that it is at times ambiguous and overly burdensome, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) remains an important protection for patients, and a valuable instrument for enforcing public policy goals in the area of emergency healthcare services. The 250 Yard Rule is a small but crucial part of EMTALA, extending the statute's protections to emergency patients who have narrowly failed to reach the hospital's entrance. Following recent revisions to EMTALA's implementing regulations, some health-care law practitioners and senior federal regulators have opined that enforcement of the 250 Yard Rule will be dramatically curtailed. This Article explores the legal and public policy origins of the 250 Yard Rule and their continuing applicability in the current regulatory environment. The Article concludes that the regulatory basis for the 250 Yard Rule remains intact and that the legislative intent behind EMTALA, as well as ongoing public policy goals, dictate that the 250 Yard Rule be preserved.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=22144472982&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=22144472982&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 15968940

AN - SCOPUS:22144472982

VL - 38

SP - 77

EP - 93

JO - Journal of health law

JF - Journal of health law

SN - 1526-2472

IS - 1

ER -