About

Joan H Krause joined the UNC School of Law faculty in 2009 and serves as the Dan K. Moore Distinguished Professor of Law. She previously held the position of Associate Dean for Faculty Development. Krause holds secondary appointments as a Professor in the Department of Social Medicine at the UNC School of Medicine and as an Adjunct Professor in the Department of Health Policy and Management at the UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health. Her teaching and research interests include health law, criminal law, and women and the law. She is the author of numerous articles and book chapters on topics such as health care fraud and abuse, health care organization and regulation, bioethics, pharmaceutical regulation, and criminal issues affecting women. Krause is also the co-author of two books: 'Health Law and Bioethics: Cases in Context' (2009) and 'Practicing Bioethics Law' (2nd edition, 2021). She attended Yale University for her undergraduate studies and Stanford Law School for her J.D., where she was elected to the Order of the Coif and served as Senior Articles Editor for the Stanford Law & Policy Review. Before her academic career, she worked as a medical writer/editor, clerked for Judge Dorothy W. Nelson of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and practiced law at Hogan & Hartson L.L.P. in Washington, D.C. Krause has also taught at Loyola University Chicago School of Law and the University of Houston Law Center, where she was the George Butler Research Professor of Law and Co-Director of the University of Houston Health Law & Policy Institute.

Research topics

• Political Science
• Sociology
• Law
• Law and economics
• Genetics
• Biology
• Psychology
• History
• Mathematics
• Business
• Obstetrics
• Medicine
• Philosophy
• Library science

Selected publications

• Health Care Fraud and the End of Chevron

  SSRN Electronic Journal · 2025-01-01

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherDOI

• Artificial Intelligence and the Evolving Landscape of Healthcare Fraud and Abuse

  SSRN Electronic Journal · 2025-01-01

  preprintOpen access1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherDOI

• Beyond Roe: Implications for End-of-Life Decision-Making During Pregnancy.

  UNC Libraries · 2025-02-22

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  The end of <em>Roe v. Wade</em> has significant implications for the autonomy of pregnant patients at the end of life. At least thirty states restrict the choice to withhold/withdraw life-sustaining treatments from pregnant patients without decisional capacity, invalidating prior advance directives and prohibiting others from choosing these options for the patient. Many restrictions are based on the <em>Roe</em> framework, applying after "viability" or similar considerations of fetal development or prospect for live birth. Scholars have also relied on the abortion framework, arguing that the restrictions impose an undue burden. The end of <em>Roe</em> will free states from having to craft limited restrictions designed to work around prior abortion jurisprudence. Similarly, advocates will no longer be able to draw support from the abortion framework, forcing them to rely instead on cases supporting rights to autonomy/bodily integrity in medical decision-making.

  PublisherDOI

• Kickbacks, Courtesies or Cost-Effectivness:Application of the Medicare Antikickback Law to the Marketing and PromotionalPractices of Drug and Medical Device Manufacturers

  SSRN Electronic Journal · 2024-01-01

  articleOpen accessSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• Consideration of the Beneficiary Inducement Statute on Access to Health Care Systems’ Population Genetic Screening Programs

  Public Health Genomics · 2023-01-01

  letterOpen access

  This article examines how the federal Beneficiary Inducement Statute (BIS) and related anti-kickback laws shape access to population genetic screening (PGS) programs, particularly for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, during a critical early-adoption phase in public health genomics. While PGS for Tier 1 conditions—such as hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, Lynch syndrome, and familial hypercholesterolemia—offers significant opportunities for early detection and prevention, large-scale implementation remains limited by cost barriers, uneven insurance coverage, and statutory restrictions that can unintentionally hinder equitable participation. The authors explain how BIS constraints complicate efforts by health systems to offer low- or no‑cost genomic screening, survey legally permissible pathways such as preventive-care exemptions, financial-need determinations, research-based offerings, and self-pay models, and discuss how existing OIG advisory opinions illuminate the potential for compliant program design. They argue that attention to BIS is essential to avoid exacerbating disparities among low-income and older adults, who already underutilize preventive services, and conclude that achieving equitable PGS dissemination will likely require multi-pronged strategies—including research-based access, organizational subsidies, and longer-term policy or insurance reforms—to ensure that emerging genomic innovations benefit diverse populations from the outset.

  PublisherDOI

• Beyond <i>Roe</i>: Implications for End-of-Life Decision-Making During Pregnancy

  The Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics · 2023 · 1 citations

  1st authorCorresponding
  • Political Science
  • Sociology
  • Law and economics

  will free states from having to craft limited restrictions designed to work around prior abortion jurisprudence. Similarly, advocates will no longer be able to draw support from the abortion framework, forcing them to rely instead on cases supporting rights to autonomy/bodily integrity in medical decision-making.

  PublisherDOI

• <i>Commentary on</i> Bouvia v. Superior Court

  Cambridge University Press eBooks · 2022-12-22

  book-chapter1st authorCorresponding

  Bouvia v. Superior Court was a California decision from 1985 in which a twenty-eight-year-old quadriplegic woman sought to have a feeding tube removed and to refuse any further lifesaving measures. The original opinion held that a competent adult has the right to refuse life-sustaining treatment but its description of “the ignominy, embarrassment, humiliation and dehumanizing aspects created by her helplessness” prompts this chapter’s authors to question whether the original court supported Bouvia’s decision because of her right to choose or because the justices believed her life was not, in fact, worth living. Professor Barry Furrow proffers a poetic feminist rewrite focusing on the factors that were important to Bouvia, rather than her inability to perform the roles that concerned the original court. Furrow also considers whether recognizing an autonomy “right” in this case ignores the larger issue of lack of resources to support disabled people. Professor Joan Krause’s commentary illuminates the original court’s decision to focus on the principle of personal autonomy to resolve this dispute - and thus to ignore any broader public responsibilities to the disabled community.

  PublisherDOI

• Pregnancy Advance Directives

  SSRN Electronic Journal · 2022 · 2 citations

  1st authorCorresponding
  • Medicine
  • Business
  • Obstetrics
  PublisherDOI

• Commentary on <i>State v. Norman</i>

  Cambridge University Press eBooks · 2022

  1st authorCorresponding
  • Political Science
  • Law
  • Political Science

  This case is the first tribal appellate court case included in any of the Feminist Judgments volumes. The case deals with equal protection and gender discrimination, with facts somewhat analogous to Michael M. v. Superior Court, 450 U.S. 464 (1981). Three male juvenile defendants were charged with second-degree sexual assault (a gender-neutral statute), whereas their purported female sex partners were not charged. The Supreme Court of the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska concluded that gender discrimination is subject to strict scrutiny under Winnebago law, and that the government had a compelling interest in charging only the male juveniles.

  PublisherDOI

• Fraud and Abuse Law in the United States

  Oxford University Press eBooks · 2020-12-15

  book-chapter1st authorCorresponding

  Abstract This chapter focuses on healthcare fraud, which remains a significant problem in the United States despite years of increased fraud enforcement. It describes the US federal government's anti–fraud activities, which include expanding the range and severity of laws targeting healthcare fraud. It also points out the role played by the United States' lack of a centralized, universal program of health insurance, which causes healthcare to be paid for by a variety of public, private, and hybrid sources. This chapter mentions the strategy of capitation as the strictest mechanism for managing care, in which a primary care physician receives a fixed per–patient payment in return for meeting the patient's healthcare needs during a set period of time. It also looks at changes made to Medicare reimbursement under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) that reward providers for the “value” rather than the volume of services provided.

  PublisherDOI

Frequent coauthors

• George Butler

  Environmental Law Institute

  9 shared

• Gail B. Agrawal

  Boston University

  9 shared

• Richard S. Saver

  University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

  7 shared

• William A. Norcross

  University of California, San Diego

  1 shared

• John T. Chibnall

  Saint Louis University

  1 shared

• David J. Doukas

  1 shared

• Marc Mendelsohn

  Washington University in St. Louis

  1 shared

• James M. DuBois

  1 shared

Education

• Ph.D., Law

  University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

  1990

• Other, Law

  University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

  1985

• B.A., Political Science

  University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

  1981

Awards & honors

• 2017 Robert G. Byrd Award for Excellence and Creativity in T…