Talk:Health law

Law High‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Health and fitness High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Health and fitness, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of health and physical fitness related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Health and fitnessWikipedia:WikiProject Health and fitnessTemplate:WikiProject Health and fitnessHealth and fitness
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Beginings

This is an important legal topic. I don't like redirecting it to a category, but it really needs some work.Mneumisi 20:31, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

Health legislation appears to be basically the same page, just written by someone else. I think that they should be merged into a single page. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Health legislation is where much of our health law comes from, but it is a separate, related subject. The law-making process is what legislation focusses on, while health law focusses on existing legal and ethical rules affecting health care, medical training, and many other subjects that have nothing directly to do with health legislation. Health law comes not just from legislation but from court decisions, from common law, and from administrative/governmental rule-making. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.54.70.20 (talk) 15:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To not merge given that scope of Health law and Medical law are sufficiently distinct to warrant separate discussion; the former focussing on public health and the latter on responsibilities of medical professionals; that there is overlap is agreed. Klbrain (talk) 19:46, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I propose merging Medical law into Health law and rewriting the article to cover the subject matter of both articles. In my experience with health law, I do not recognize the distinction currently upheld between the two articles, where health law supposedly refers to "macro" issues (e.g. "operations, regulatory and transactional issues") whereas medical law supposedly refers to "micro" issues such as the duties of clinicians and the rights of patients (the latter definition appears to be based exclusively on an American instead of an international, comparative context). Instead, the terms "health law" or "medical law" are synonymous and refer to a legal field dealing with both issues.

Examples are legion. For example, the content of The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Health Law cuts across both of these issue areas regardless of being a book on "health law". Also, readers of the European Journal of Health Law and the Medical Law Review will know that neither journal is restricted to one issue area specifically.

The choice of health law over medical law for the name of the article is based on my – admittedly anecdotal – experience that medical law is often used in the UK, whereas health law is more prevalent in international discourses. Crucially however, the point is that both terms refer to the same thing, and thus, we don't need two articles. Which title is used is less important to me.

I will notify WikiProject Medicine and WikiProject Law about this discussion. InsaneHacker (💬) 20:07, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A merger would also require dealing with the {{Medical law sidebar}}. InsaneHacker (💬) 20:11, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that "latter" in my original post should in reality be "former". InsaneHacker (💬) 11:48, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The synonymousness of health law and medical law is also noted by Hervey and McHale in European Union Health Law, p. 10. InsaneHacker (💬) 20:20, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since noone has objected to the merger even after notification of the relevant editor groups, there is consensus for merging. InsaneHacker (💬) 16:50, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Health Law and the European Union, p 13 et seq, seems to suggest that "health law" and "medical law" are arguably distinct concepts, the broader one ("health law") having evolved from the narrower one ("medical law"). Medical Law in the Netherlands has "medical law" as a subset of "health law". As does Leenen quoted in Medical Law in Belgium. As does Global Health Law: An Introduction, at p 15. As does Medical Law in Turkey. Health Care Law-making in Central and Eastern Europe, at p 55, says there are multiple definitions. James500 (talk) 19:27, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Good to finally get some outside input. I guess there is terminological disagreement in the literature then. As stated above, the Oxford Handbook and several journals (particularly EJHL) do not recognize the distinction. The sources by Gevers (2008) and Rynning & Hartlev (2011) in /Sandbox also use health law as a catch-all term for the whole field. What to do then, since there are arguments for both solutions? I will note that the current two-article approach creates problems with interwiki linking, as some languages definitely do not operate with this distinction. InsaneHacker (💬) 20:18, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
merge at first I was going to start muttering about how the breadth of health could be problematic and could mask important medical topics with vague discussion about policy, politics and equity. But reviewing the articles, neither is particular complete so my feeling is kind of... do whatever you want as long as you are adding material! Talpedia 19:28, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
merge per Talpedia rationale--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 12:03, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Those areas of law aren't the same. Health public law is directed towards people. Medical law is about patient care. Here is the article that shows the difference:

Public health identifies and measures threats to the health of populations, develops governmental policies in response to these concerns, and seeks to assure certain health and related services. In contrast, patient care focuses on individuals—diagnosis, treatment, relief of suffering, and rehabilitation
— Maya Peled-Raz (20 December 2017). "Human rights in patient care and public health-a common ground". Public health reviews. 38: 29. doi:10.1186/S40985-017-0075-2. ISSN 0301-0422. PMC 5810084. PMID 29450100. Wikidata Q49954514.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)

As I understand, medical law is about patients and health law is about society. For example Health law may promote public health. D6194c-1cc (talk) 12:27, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.