On The Record - Columbus School of Law

A P P R E C I A T I N G E R U D I T I O N2007–2008well as many of China’s own citizens, aslacking in both effectiveness and compassion.Tellingly titled, Simon’s articleexplores the social, cultural and politicalbarriers that China must yet grapple within order to live up to the idealized imageit sought to present to the world duringthe Olympics.Publishing Process: Quick and smooth.As an invited symposium participant,Simon’s paper was anticipated and easilyfound a spot within a respected lawjournal.Peer Reviews: “This is an important topicmainly for folks in China; it is an attemptto influence policy-makers. I think thatpeople who teach Chinese law in theWest will also be interested,” says Simon.ProfessorGeorge P. Smith■ Widely recognized expert in bioethicsand health law■ Founding faculty editor of CUA’sJournal of Contemporary HealthLaw and Policy■ Author of 14 books, 21 monographs and152 law review articles, book chaptersand essays■ Listed in Who's Who in the World andOutstanding Writers of the 20thCenturyLatest Article: “Policy Making and theNew Medicine: Managing a MagnificentObsession.” Journal of Health andBiomedical Law 3 (2008):3030.Summary: The work explores the extentto which new powers of medical technologyshould be welcomed and promoted,or curtailed and constrained bynotions of the “common good.” Forexample, there is much debate overwhether experiments on human cloningand stem cell research can be undertakenethically, even though there is greatpromise for using this research to combatvarious diseases and thus advancethe common good from the standpoint ofhealth care improvement.Author’s Insight: “My essay is on a topicfront and center in the press and on televisionalmost daily. It concludes thatadvancing and pursuing improved healthcare, through investigations into thewonders of the new medical technology,should be the paramount value for evaluatingthe acceptability of scientific studyand investigation. Effecting clear andbalanced policies in this area is very difficult.This essay is unique in its positionthat a balance of interests can indeed bereached.”Publishing Process: A breeze. Smith wasinvited by the journal to write on the topicof adapting public policy to new medicaltechnologies. Coincidentally, his latestessay was already in progress and thetiming was perfect. He submitted his workand, as has usually been the case in hisacademic career, the article was promptlyaccepted, edited and published.Peer Reviews: This latest article canonly enhance Smith’s stature as a singularthinker and writer in the field of legalbioethics. Reviews of his recent book,Distributive Justice and the NewMedicine, have set the tone for collegialacceptance with such comments as,“[Smith is] one of the world’s leadingexperts on the legal and ethical issuesraised by modern medicine,” and that hiswriting shows “insight and authority, andoffers a perspective that will influencethe policy debates.” Professor JonathanHerring of the University of Oxford hasobserved that Smith’s body of workbrings “important new insights into thecomplex area of health care resourcesand should be read by anyone in seekingto create a just society.”This is Who We AreThe collective body of scholarship produced by a law schoolfaculty is its professional thumbprint. It not only speaks authoritativelyabout the backgrounds and interests of individual professors,but it also helps to define an academic signature that ispersuasive to prospective students as they research law schools.The books, book chapters, reviews, monographs and law journalarticles produced by the faculty of the Columbus School ofLaw—its intellectual banner—make a powerful statement: Thisis who we are, and this is the kind of rigorous, reasoned andinnovative learning that we produce. That message is resonatingproud and clear across the world of legal higher education.Fall–Winter 2008 / C UALAWYER 13