ORAL CONTRACEPTIVES AND THE LEARNED INTERMEDIARY DOCTRINE

DSpace/Manakin Repository

ORAL CONTRACEPTIVES AND THE LEARNED INTERMEDIARY DOCTRINE

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisor Hutt, Peter Barton en_US
dc.contributor.author Hayenga, Matthew A. en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2012-06-15T20:28:07Z
dc.date.issued 2002 en_US
dc.identifier.citation ORAL CONTRACEPTIVES AND THE LEARNED INTERMEDIARY DOCTRINE (2002 Third Year Paper) en
dc.identifier.uri http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:8889471
dc.description.abstract Ordinarily prescription drug manufacturers aren’t required to give direct warnings to patients regarding the risks associated with their products. Instead, manufacturers need only inform the prescribing physician of these risks. The duty to inform the patient then falls on the physician. This common law rule is referred to as the “learned intermediary doctrine.†By providing adequate information to the prescribing physician, who is believed to be in a better position to discuss the risks and benefits of a specific drug to a particular patient, the manufacturer is relieved of its duty to provide a direct warning. However, in the mid-1980s, in a series of decisions, several courts began recognizing an exception to this doctrine for oral contraceptives, in some instances finding civil tort liability despite the presence of FDA-approved labeling accompanying the product. Although only a minority rule today, this exception to the learned intermediary doctrine has been the subject of much debate and has influenced legal scholarship on several other issues. This exception, or more accurately the questionable wisdom of its adoption, is the focus of this paper. After discussing the policy justifications for the learned intermediary doctrine and the development and risks and benefits of oral contraceptives, this paper details the case law that created the oral contraceptive exception to the learned intermediary doctrine, as well as several related extensions of the exception that courts and commentators have suggested. After setting this stage, the paper then argues against the exception as both factually flawed and contrary to public policy, ultimately advocating the abandonment of this minority rule. en
dc.language.iso en_US en
dash.license LAA en_US
dc.subject Food and Drug Law en
dc.subject contraception en
dc.subject intermediary en
dc.title ORAL CONTRACEPTIVES AND THE LEARNED INTERMEDIARY DOCTRINE en
dc.type Paper (for course/seminar/workshop) en_US
dc.date.available 2012-06-15T20:28:07Z

Files in this item

Files Size Format View
Hayenga.pdf 238.7Kb PDF View/Open
Hayenga.rtf 185.6Kb RTF file View/Open
Hayenga.html 141.9Kb HTML View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

 
 

Search DASH


Advanced Search
 
 

Submitters