Postscript.

• Position: Practice monopolies and migration of health workers

The causal link between scope of practice monopolies and migration of health workers should be investigated further.

Generally, the problems of migration are significant, (1) especially with regard to health workers. (2) There are many treaties covering the areas of refuge and asylum, (3) trafficking, (4) and employment related migration. (5) Many of these are considered to be problems arising from the phenomena of globalization, (6) an effect of development. (7) Solutions have been suggested for all levels of the problem, including for the effects of globalization on migration (8) and the effects of migration on human rights in sending, transit, and receiving countries. (9) Solutions focus on international relations and national and local governance. (10)

The main problems for sending countries are (1) that they pay for health education that is consumed by receiving countries, and (2) there are fewer health workers left to care for local populations. (11) The United States is one of the leading receiving states of migrant health workers. (12) Understanding demand for health workers in the United States is complicated. It is not clear whether demand should be based on a normative analysis (how many workers there ought to be) or a descriptive analysis (how many workers there are at a given time). (13) In any event, as the analysis in this paper shows, it is likely scope-of-practice regimes, all of which are instituted at the state level but influenced by national policies, have a restrictive effect on supply of health workers, especially non-MD health workers. (14)

Given the forgoing, it is important to understand the effects of scope-of-practice legislation on the human rights of the peoples of sending countries. "Human rights" refers to the international moral and legal orders instituted to protect individuals and peoples, the norms by which justice is measured. (15) Human rights are similar to what are called "civil rights" or "constitutional rights" in the United States. (16) I argue in this Article that the policies of the Federation of Boards of Medical Examiners and the American Medical Association, through lobbying and such organizations as the Scope of Practice Partnership, materially contribute to the degradation of the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens to autonomy with regard to health care. Are they likewise degrading the human rights of peoples in sending and transiting countries? There are at least two mechanisms by which this could be occurring. First, the scope of practice monopoly plays a pivotal role in privileging health workers with medical degrees. This restricts both the supply of MDs and the supply of non-MDs in the United States, which in turn increases the "pull" on...