May 2016 Webinar

View all blog posts under Online Master's in Health Law and Policy | View all blog posts under webinars

Program Overview Webinar with Prof. Janet Dolgin (May 2016)


Hi everyone and thank you for joining us today. Today, Hofstra Law is hosting a webinar highlighting the program. My name is Rachelle Dizon and I’ll be your moderator for today.

Before we begin, I’d like to go over the logistics of the presentation. First as a reminder, to cut down on background noise, you’re listen-mode only.  Therefore, you can hear the presenter, but they cannot hear you.

Second, if you have any questions during the presentation, just type your question in the chat box which is located in the right window of your screen and hit Enter.  Please feel free to ask your questions as you think of them, but know that all answers will be held until the end of the presentation.

And lastly, this webinar is currently being recorded., and you’ll have the opportunity to have this email and link for your reference in the upcoming weeks.

So, let’s get started and review today’s agenda. Today’s agenda we’ll take a look into Hofstra Law, go through some program details, review faculty spotlight, review the curriculum overview. We’ll also take a look at a couple of courses, address some frequently asked questions, and also review admission requirements. Also, there’s an opportunity at the end of the webinar to ask your own questions during the live Q&A session.

As a reminder, throughout the presentation, there are a few polling questions for you. This allows us to be more interactive with one another and also provides some feedback about your interests.

So, let’s get started and introduce your panelists today. Today we’re very excited to have the opportunity to have the following panelists from Hofstra Law.

First, we have Professor Janet Dolgin who is the director of Hofstra Institution for Health Law and Policy. She also teaches two of the courses, one is the Bioethics and Law course and the Public Law and Policy and Ethics course. So, thank you so much for joining us today.

As well, joining her, we have Anne Smith who is an enrollment advisor for the Masters in Health Law and Policy program. So, thank you so much to the both of you for taking part in our webinar.

Before we jump into the presentation, here’s our first polling question of today. First off, we want to know what you want to learn today. Is it:

A – Faculty Information

B – Program Details

C – Admission Requirements

D – Career opportunities

E – Curriculum overview

F – Other

To answer this polling question, the polling question should pop up on the right-hand side of your screen.  We’ll take a couple of seconds here to allow all our attendees to answer that question. Again, you can find that question on the right-hand side of your screen.

We’ll just give everyone another 10 seconds to answer that question here. And from the looks of it, it’s pretty even – 44% of you want to learn more about the program details as well as some career opportunities.  So those are definitely some key points to bring out in the presentation so thank you so much in taking part of that polling question.

Okay, so I’d like to hand things off first to Anne Smith, again, she’s an enrollment advisor, to talk about Hofstra. Anne?

Anne: Thank you Rachel, and welcome to all those who are able to join us this evening.  For those of you who don’t know, Hofstra University’s physical campus is located in Hempstead, New York. The university is regionally accredited by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education.

The Maurice A. Deane is part of Hofstra University, and is an American Bar Association approved school. Although this program is offered online, we consider our online students to be members of our community. Students are invited to attend their graduation ceremony on campus and can visit at any time, although it is never required.

As I’m sure you all know, health law and policy has never more complex than it is right now, and it’s only going to get more complicated with the new administration coming into office. Our newly developed curriculum touches on the things that are relevant to health law and policy today. This is an exciting time for students to specialize in this rapid growth area.

The program takes on topics such as the Affordable Care Act, Medicare and Medicaid Law, Public Health, Bioethics, and Drug Development – all topics that are so important in the business of health care today.

At the conclusion of the program, our students will be able to define themselves as health law experts as well as be equipped to advise on a wide range of topics in health care law.

Here you’ll see the list of the required courses for the online Master of Arts and Master of Laws in Health Law Policy program.

These courses are designed to be taken one course at a time on a carousel model.

The Master of Arts takes two years to complete, and the Master of Laws takes 18 months to complete since it requires fewer courses.

Our Master of Arts students are required to take Introduction to the American Legal System and Health Law courses prior to entering the core curriculum along with our Master of Law students.

The two highlighted courses are taught by our panelist Professor Janet Dolgin.

Rachel:  Thanks Anne. This part of the presentation we wanted to have a faculty spotlight on Professor Dolgin as mentioned before, she is the director of Hofstra Institution of Health Law and Policy.  As Anne mentioned, she does teach two of the courses, Bioethics and the Law course and the Public Health Law and Policy Ethics course.



Professor Dolgin has written many articles published in a variety of law reviews, other scholarly journals and edited volumes. Much of this work has analyzed legal responses to shifts in the family and to shifts in structures of health care within the United States and elsewhere

As can see on your screen there’s a brief bio of Professor Dolgin, going forward with that, here’s a list of recent health law conferences she has directed.

So now, this is an opportunity for Professor Dolgin to explain more about her work and also introduce herself as well.

Professor Dolgin:  Thanks Rachel, thanks Anne. Yeah, I think talking about some of the conferences in health law that we’ve done in the past two or three years is a great way to introduce people to the scope and character of our work.

We’ve been really fortunate to get funding for a series of conferences in health law from the Garfunkel Wild law firm. Some of the conferences will really give you some sense of how exciting and challenging health care law and health care policy are today.

One conference that actually is not on the PowerPoint because we just did it is called Mission Critical: Veteran’s Health Summit.  It was really a remarkable conference including a stunning set of panelists. All of whom talked about identifying viable solutions to a large set of unmet health needs that face veterans in the United States today.

This conference is actually a very, very small part of a much larger project – the Mission Critical project that we are developing at Hofstra to serve the legal and other needs of veterans in particular, in our community and then potentially more widely.

Last year we hosted the conference, the first listed on the PowerPoint – Puff the Magic Medicine.  The truth is I still love the title. The Medical Marijuana Movement. That conference explored the social and legal implications of legalizing medical marijuana. A very popular and widely discussed issue.

In 2014, we did a conference called A Spoonful of Sugar. Named after Mary Poppins – A Spoonful of Sugar : Ethics and Practice.  That conference focused on – and I’m going to say this carefully – the ethics of the politics of health care.

Other recent conferences that we have done have looked at the economic, social and legal implications of the Affordable Care Act, at appropriate and inappropriate uses of cloud-based apps and social media in health care.  Of course, here, a very central concern is the protection of privacy. We asked even simple questions – should health care professionals respond to patients on Facebook. That really raises significant HIPAA issues. And yet, a lot of clinicians said that they felt reluctant to say “No I won’t be your friend” to patients, especially pediatricians interestingly.

We’ve done lots of other conferences. One looks at systems of health care coverage and delivery that have been successful or at least moderately successful in other nations.  We posed them as models that could respond to various concerns that still face our nation’s health care system.

In short, as you see, we really have a very robust  series of conferences in the health law domain and we look forward to doing one or two more every year. Maybe some of you, if you join our program can be involved in one way or another in our conferences.

Rachel: That’s a great point, thank you so much for sharing your experience.

Moving forward with this presentation, this is part of the section where we’ll do a course spotlight on the courses that Professor Dolgin teaches.

We’ll start off with the first one here with Bioethics and the Law. So Professor Dolgin, take it away.

Professor Dolgin: Thanks. Bioethics and Law was offered for the very first time in the online program this Spring. Bioethics and Law and the Public Health Law Policy and Ethics course are discrete, but I think you’ll see they’re connected in some really fascinating ways and I’ll explain what that means.

Both of these courses explore the relationship among law, ethics and policy, and as they are relevant to the health of individual, both the nation’s population to some extent a more global population. Both consider challenging questions about the law’s role in responding and maybe even the law’s role in shaping ethics guidelines and public policy in the health care arena.

For me bioethics is, quite honestly, super exciting. I just feel so blessed that I can work in this area. It deals with essential life and death questions that face– I can’t say almost everyone – but face absolutely everyone because everyone is born and everyone will die.

Societies have – on the one hand – dealt with bioethical challenges for as long as there were people were born, aged, reproduced, fell ill, and died. As many of you know, the Greek healer Hippocrates, is said to have composed an oath that bears his name – the Hippocratic Oath – that is still, in some part at least, recited in medical schools’ graduations. He composed it in the fourth century B.C.

In a way, you see, bioethics has existed as long as there have been people. But in the contemporary West, bioethics and bioethics and the law are new, at least in university context. It really entered the world of modern academia in the middle of the twentieth century. In fact, interestingly, the first card in the Library of Congress catalogue that bears the term “bioethics” can be dated to the 1970’s.  So on the one hand, it’s a very ancient field, and on the other hand, a very modern field.

As a modern field, it has responded to some very specific developments. In particular, it’s responded to shifts in the world of medicine and shifts in the character of the patient-physician relationship. It also has responded to new, exciting but challenging – both ethically and technologically challenging – developments that allow us to, for example, keep people alive on tubes long after they would have been alive even half- century ago to provide for the birth of babies without regard for space and time in some sense. Babies now can be born – I mean we’re not even sure how long after – but decades certainly, after the gametes that produced them are created.

In the same period, we’ve seen relevant and very remarkable shifts in the law’s vision of human rights in the United States and in the world more generally. These trends have all come together in the creation and development of bioethics which is now taught – I’d be surprised there’s not a college, a law school, or a medical school where bioethics by that name or some other name, for example –  medical ethics, this is taught. This is really now, a de rigueur course.

The field is very exciting also, in that it involves both theoretically inquiry and really practical responses to the dilemmas that people face in hospitals, in other health care facilities and in their own lives apart from health care facilities.

Interestingly, many hospitals now in the United States have ethics committees that are specifically constituted to deal with bioethical conundrums and disputes within the hospital perhaps between a patient and family members and health care professionals or even sometimes among health care professionals or between health care professionals and a hospital’s administration.

The work of these committees has limited, as you might guess, the number of cases that have actually gone to court.  And that’s interesting – It certainly has saved time and money, but it also raises some really tough questions because on the whole, bioethics committees don’t attend, or at least don’t have to attend to precedence and they’re not necessarily governed by a system of rules and procedures. So, the decisions that come out of bioethics committees are in that way very different than the decisions that come out of courts. Those decisions for example are appealable.  So yeah, you can appeal a bioethics committee decision to a court, but you have to go into a completely different new arena in order to do that. The arena of the court system.

I think cases about end-of-life questions raise a very interesting example of the kind of case that courts began to seriously to entertain pretty much coincident with the development of bioethics in this country in the 1970s, but now these questions are very often handled not in courts, but by bioethics committees in hospitals.

An interesting case and one of the very first in this arena is case I think even people who don’t work in bioethics may have heard of.  The case of Karen Ann Quinlan offers a very powerful illustration of what these cases might involve.

Karen Quinlan was a young woman. She collapsed one day – one evening for reasons that are still not entirely clear. It was in the 1970s.  She entered what’s now called a persistent vegetative stage although that stage had only been named very shortly before the case developed.  The case ended up in New Jersey’s highest court, and that court was asked to resolve a dispute between Karen’s parents – Karen herself of course in a vegetative was unable to understand the issues at stake and of course was unable to talk or render any decision about what she wanted to happen.

The dispute involved her parents wanting to withdraw respiratory support which they thought would be the end of Karen’s life and the hospital which said “No, we won’t withdraw support”. A very interesting thing about the case is when it was decided the position of physicians, almost universally in the United States was – at least the official physicians – we simply don’t disconnect tubes that will likely lead to a patient’s death. That’s inappropriate on every level.

So, it was really very surprising and an important shift when the New Jersey Supreme Court held for the parents. Allowed the father to serve as guardian of his daughter and to authorize the end of respiratory support for Karen. Just as a footnote, that happened, but in her case at least, the respiratory support proved unessential. She lived for another 15 years I believe, after respiratory support was withdrawn.

Now, many of these cases are not handled in court, they’re handled in hospitals by ethics committees.

Another important arena where bioethical deliberation becomes important involves the opposite end of life – the beginning of life. Some of you may have heard, for example, of the case of Baby M. And one of the interesting things about that case is that it was decided by the very same court that decided the Karen Ann Quinlan case – New Jersey’s highest court.

This was not a case that rose in a hospital setting. It concerned a child’s parentage, but it was a very unusual parentage case because it centered around a contract – a written agreement between two people who intended to become the parents of a baby and a woman who agreed to serve as a surrogate. The highest court in New Jersey decided that surrogacy contracts of this sort violated public policy and they identified Baby M’s parents as her biological father who was her intending father and her biological mother who was not her intending mother, who was a surrogate.

One of the interesting things about this decision is it lets the intending biological father’s wife, the intending mother, without any legal status vis-à-vis this child, who was given as a matter of custody arrangement to the father. So the child actually in very large part grew up in the home of the intending father and the intending mother, but the intending mother was in effect was legally a step mother to the child

A few years after Baby M in 1988, remarkable developments in reproductive technology led to disputes of a sort that would have been considered science fiction three decades earlier. Disputes for example, between two biological mothers – one genetic and one gestational.  And in some way, the decision in Baby M served as a fulcrum around which courts that heard these much more technologically complicated cases figured out how to respond.

Bioethicists also consider questions about human subject research about the balance between patient autonomy and clinician beneficence in health care. Questions about the moral status of animals, embryos, people without consciousness, robots. They consider conundrums created by the possibility of transplanting organs from dead donors to people in need of an organ, or from the body of a living donor to the body of another person in need of an organ.

As you can imagine, all of these questions are very, very, challenging and difficult and just essential to what it means to be a person.

Other bioethical questions focus around communities and populations. Here, we see the merging of bioethics with public health law policy and ethics.

This course, the Public Health Law, Policy and Ethics course differs from Bioethics and Law in that the focus is on communities, it’s on populations, and it’s not in particular on individuals.

This course examines a wide set of issues. It will be offered for the first time in the fall of this year. I’m just going to give you a much briefer of sense of what’s involved in this course.

It examines, for example, the appropriate balance between protecting individual liberty, and state regulations aimed at safeguarding population health – public health – that infringe on liberty.  You may say, “What does that mean?” Well for example, what about a law that requires vaccination? That is aimed at protecting public health, but it certainly will intrude on the liberty, particularly the liberty of someone who says, “I don’t believe in vaccinations, I don’t want one”. So how do we reach an appropriate balance in that case?

This course will also examine limits in the state’s obligation to protect people from harm. In particular from harm due to illness, natural disasters, bioterrorism.  It examines the impact of individual decisions and behaviors on health, and the impact of other factors – factors like class and access to health care and the overall health status of populations, both small populations within communities, and the nation’s population.

The sort of task that public health law is and others trained in public health law take up could involve challenging or defending depending on which side you’re on. The constitutionality of this sort of law – I mentioned mandatory vaccination law – that people interested in public health law might look at regulations in posing quarantine or isolation rules on people in the context of epidemics or threatened epidemics – think about Ebola last year.

People looking into public health and public health law might attempt to discern the fair distribution of scarce resources in medical emergencies, natural disasters, or in the face of bioterrorism.  They might address environmental factors that affect population health. For example, what about the effects of toxins in food, in air, in water?  All of these are things that people interested in public health and public health law look at and respond to.

The crucial point is that public health approaches illness very differently than the traditional medical system. It doesn’t focus on the individual patient or on the clinician-patient relationship. It focuses on the health and the ill-health of populations.

So, both bioethics and public health law are really important to anyone working in a hospital or in any other health care facility – in a nursing home for example.

Both bioethicists and public health law experts provide support to patient populations and they’re very important in shaping the entire tone of our health care system.

Both Bioethics and Public Health Law asks students to respond – and here I’m talking about the courses -in live sessions. There’s a live session every week, live of course meaning online, you don’t have to be anywhere. Students respond in intra-student discussions which have been very powerful and compelling and important and have involved students in discussing issues with each other. It’s just a marvelous forum for students to explore with each other with professor supervision their various takes on various topics.  And both courses involve significant, though short writing exercises in which students write about the challenging issues that face lawyers, clinicians, social workers, scientists, clergies, and policy makers in various health care fields today.

Rachel:  Thank you so much Professor Dolgin for providing us in-depth information about your two courses. Those are really great feedback to have. On that note the second polling question is for attendees. I just opened it up

Which course are you most interested in?

Again, I’ll take a couple of seconds for our attendees to answer that polling question.

Again, you can find that polling question on the right hand of your screen, and we’ll just take a few seconds for everyone to complete that polling.

Just 10 more seconds before I close this polling. And it looks like 33% of you are interested in all programs, which is great. 22% is interested in Health Law and also 22% is Bioethics and the Law. So definitely a good mixer of people wanting to know a majority of the program.  So, thank you so much for your feedback.

So the next part of our presentation is we wanted to collect some frequently asked questions before we get into the live Q&A we collected the top three that are frequently asked.  First, we’ll start off with the first question, hand it over to Anne.

Q: What is the online learning experience like?

A:  One of our favorite things about this program is that there are no set class times. However, there are instructor-led live web sessions available. They’re meant to be an enrichment piece, and are never mandatory.  Our current student population really enjoy these interactions which are always recorded so you won’t miss anything if you’re not able to attend. Many of our students agree they receive much more interaction with their instructor and peers than they had initially expected. We strongly encourage these relationships created between peers and faculty members as they often extend beyond the scope of the program.

Q: What does the program structure look like?

A:  The program is designed to be taken one course at a time.  Each course is seven weeks long and there’s a one-week break between each course.  Students are expected to spend approximately fifteen hours per week on study in order to be successful in their course. These fifteen hours per week may not necessarily be online, and it also includes your reading, research, assignments, study time and so forth. Both the Master of Arts and the Masters of Laws programs have three entry dates per year: January, May and September. Although the September start is actually at the end of August this year.  The program is a hundred percent online, and there is never any reason for you to visit campus,  however, if you are in the area, you are absolutely welcome.

Q:  Next question is for Professor Dolgin. How to you see the current career outlook for people in health law? Do you see any trends?

A: Ha-ha well, ten years ago, I might have answered this differently. The employment picture in health care today is just remarkably positive. Since the passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010, more than a million new jobs have been created in the health care area. More than a hundred million people in the U.S. now receive health care through Medicaid and Medicare. These are giant programs really desperately looking for people with training in law and in health law- both lawyers and non-lawyers. The nation’s aging population suggests that health care is going to become ever the more important. Right now, there are more jobs than there are people to fill them.

People who can navigate this system, who can understand and use health law and policy are going to be in demand within the nation’s workforce. There’s no question about it. It’s going to be very useful to know how law and policy affect patients and how they affect hospitals and other health care facilities. People with this kind of knowledge and with good communication skills – which is very important in many, many jobs areas will be very, very well-positioned to interface with lawyers and with the government.

Attorneys and policy experts can participate in many new practice opportunities. For example, governmental, non-profit, and corporate groups working on big data in health care will need many more people who have knowledge in health law and policy. Knowledge these areas is essential for – just to name some fields – fraud and abuse enforcement, programs aimed at protecting health information, privacy, health care merges, health care acquisitions, with regard to coverage subsidies, with regard to the structure of medical homes, and for planning programs of emergency preparedness which goes to the public health field.

Obviously, none of us can guarantee that anybody will get a job but if you’re looking for a job, health care and health care law is the place to look today.

Rachel: Right. Thank you. Going to our last frequently asked question –  this actually goes to the both of you. We’ll start with Anne.

From your perspective, what advice do you have for prospective students considering taking the MA / LLM program?

A: So, the first thing is that I think like it’s very important to budget your time the same way you would budget your money. Since many of our students are working fulltime, it’s imperative to set aside the appropriate amount of time for studies in order to ensure your success.  Also, use the networking resources available to you.  We have a very engaged faculty and many students in high level positions within health care organizations. Conduct yourself with professionalism, and build relationships that will lead to the types of opportunities that you’re looking for

Rachel: Professor Dolgin, from your perspective, what advice do you have for students?

Entering a health law program is a really important decision, but I really think anybody who decides to do this will be increasingly pleased that he or she did it.

It’s a fascinating area in which to work and it’s central to American politics, and it’s an area in need of trained professionals – both lawyers and non-lawyers with knowledge of the legal components of health care delivery, financing and the structure of our health care system.

Students in our programs can expect to interact with their professors and – really wonderful thing is – to interact very actively with students and professors at the same time.  All of our students are adults, all are educated and all are intelligent. We really found in the courses that we’ve carried so far that the community of students is engaged and engaging. We the professors have learned almost as much from our students as they have learned from us.

We encourage everybody to review the program very carefully, it’s a big decision, but we’re really confident that if you review this program, you’ll see how much it offers you in gaining new perspectives, new colleagues and even new work opportunities.

Rachel: Thank you both for your feedback. Before we get into our last slide which is admission requirements just want to remind our attendees that our live Q&A session is coming up after this, so again if you have any questions for Anne or Professor Dolgin, please type your questions in the chat box which is directed at the bottom right hand of your screen and then we’ll definitely get to your question. On that note, hand over the presentation to Anne with the admission requirements.

In terms of the admissions requirements, a GMAT, GRE or LSAT test is not required for admission.  In order to apply, the Master of Arts applicants must have a minimum of a bachelor’s degree from a regionally accredited institution in any discipline. For the Master of Laws program, a Juris Doctor or Bachelor of Laws degree is required.

There is an online application for the program. If you intend to apply, please contact me directly and I will send over a link to the online application system along with the detailed application instructions and our federal student loans school code. Once you’ve completed your application form, you’ll upload your updated resume and a professional statement directly to your application, add contact information to send your two electronic recommendation letter requests, and have your official transcript mailed to us. This process usually takes two to three weeks. Decisions on admission are usually made within five to ten business days.

The deadline for the upcoming start date of August 29th is the first of August. However, I encourage you to get your application in as soon as possible since the fall term is our most popular start date.  Once you submit your application for review, we will reserve your space for the fall start date.

So now for this part of the presentation, we’ll go to the live Q&A session.   Again, taking your questions for Anne and Professor Dolgin.  Let’s just go right ahead and jump into it.

The first one is actually to Anne: Do we need to submit all the application requirements at one time, or can we submit them as we complete/receive them?

Once you create your online application, you can go in and out of it, however is convenient for you. So if you still have to update your resume you haven’t written your professional statement, you can upload those once they’re available.

Let’s go on to the next one. This one goes to Professor Dolgin. Is this a writing-intensive program with a lot of essay writing required?

The truth is, that depends on the particular course. My courses do not have any quizzes or exams, so all of the assessment of students beginning in session one or two depends on short essays. I really mean short – two, three pages. I personally would find it very hard to fairly assess a student in Bioethics through a quiz because the kinds of questions I could ask would not have anything much to do with the pressing problems that bioethicists face. In my courses there is writing. I don’t think it’s burdened, and some of the other courses depend much more on quizzes and exams and have very little writing.

Rachel: The next question also goes to Professor Dolgin. Can you describe how you engage with your students?

This is a great question, and one of the things that’s exciting. I must say, this is my first venture into online learning.  I’m really delighted to see what’s involved, and in the beginning before I taught a class, I wondered about that.

There’s a great deal of engagement between all of us. It’s really a community First of all, we do have a live session every week. It’s recoded for people who can’t make the particular time and date.  In addition, we spend a great deal of time preparing these courses with the aim of making them interactive.  I responded, in the one class I taught so far, to many, many student emails. I often received exciting comments from students both online and in private emails.


I think in some ways, the course allowed for a slightly different form, but quite as much professor-student and student- student interaction as on- site courses.

Thank you so much Professor Dolgin. Going on to the next question, this one goes to Anne. What are some advantages to the LL.M program/M. A split?

Some of the advantages to having students who are lawyers and students who aren’t in the same course is the collaboration between students of vastly different experience. It tends to be a huge benefit as our students learn from each other in discussion board posts, so varying experiences and backgrounds is always an asset.

Thank you. Moving on to the next question again, this one also goes to you, Anne.  What type of information should professional letters of recommendation entail?

Those letters should include the recommender’s opinion on your ability to do well in a graduate program based on their professional or academic interactions with you. Some people you might want to consider asking for these letters of recommendations are people in managerial positions, supervisors, mentors, someone from your area of work. What we don’t accept are letters from friends or family.

This next question goes to Professor Dolgin – are there any interactive components of the program, or is it more of independent study?

I think it’s a great combination of both. There are, for example, discussion forums that allow students to respond to a set of issues, and then in my courses at least, I ask students to reply online in the discussion forum to the perspectives and statements of other students.  And then typically, at the end of that set of interactions, I will say something and comment on one or another of the various responses. Although it’s not necessarily synchronous in time, there’s a great deal of opportunity for interactive relationships.

Perfect. Okay, we do have time today for a couple more questions. Anne this one goes to you, how long is the average admissions process?

It typically takes two to three weeks to complete an application from start to finish. The recommendation and the transcript usually take the longest as they rely on someone else, so that’s why it’s best to request these items very early in the process.

Okay so, for today, this will be our last question for our webinar here, and this one goes to Professor Dolgin – Can you provide examples of the types of assignments you offer within your courses?

Yeah sure. For example, in the very first week of Bioethics students learn about some of the philosophical theories that provide a grounding for bioethicists’ responses and we give the students a – what is called a hypothetical, other professions may call a case study – involving, actually the one I gave last term was one involving a transplant situation, and then we ask students to respond to the dilemma described in the case study from the perspective of each of the philosophical positions that they have already studied through the material that we present to them and through their assigned readings.

Thank you, and that was our last question for today. For those that had more questions that weren’t able to be addressed today, please feel free to contact your enrollment advisor which is Anne Ellis. Her information will be up on the screen after you answer this polling question.

Just wanted to get your thoughts on future webinars. What topics are you interested in for future webinars? Is it:

A -Current Health Law Industry Trends

B – Specific Course Overview

C – Application Requirement Review

D – Learning Outcomes

E – Other

Again, thank you so much for joining today’s webinar, we’ll give a couple more seconds for people to complete this poll.

From the looks of it, 78% of you that responded to the poll want to learn more about the current health law industry trends. 11% want to know more about the application requirements, and also 11% of you want to learn more about the learning outcomes. So thank you so much for the feedback, that will definitely be helpful for future webinars with Hofstra Law.

As mentioned, here is Anne Smith’s contact information if you have further questions about the program. Please feel free to contact her by phone or email and also visit our website if you have any more questions.

I want to take this opportunity to thank our panelists today – Professor Dolgin for joining today as well as Anne Smith.

Wasn’t too sure, Professor Dolgin, if you have any lasting comments before we end today’s webinar.

Just one – it was a question that Anne answered very well, but I just wanted to add a word on the issue of M. As and LL. Ms learning together. One of the things that I think is very crucial to the development and future of our health care system is to level professional silos and to build interdisciplinary policy efforts. I think by having lawyers work with whatever professions people in the M.A program are in – the clergy, social work, nursing, medicine, science – it creates the most fruitful sort of environment in which people can think seriously about how to participate in and shape the nation’s health care system.

Perfect. Thank you so much. On that note, again thank you to our attendees and our panelists. Again, this webinar was being recorded. We’ll provide you this link in the upcoming weeks. Thank you everybody again, and have a great day.