Search the Lounge


« Max Planck Institute Scholarships in Legal History | Main | LSAC and Predicting Applicants for 2016-17, Part 8 »

February 02, 2016


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I. Glenn Cohen

Kim, I am curious what you think about the settlement? While removing the offending language from the ASRM documents is a form of relief, and perhaps as much as could be expected from an antitrust lawsuit against the organization, my prior is that most clinics will cling to that old standard in their pricing. Suppose I am right, is there any further relief available in such a case? I guess I am curious about the "shadow" of alleged antitrust violations and what happens if players in a market stick with them after the actual alleged concerted action is over. Curious to hear your thoughts...

Kim Krawiec

Interesting question, Glenn, and you may be right. It will be hard to know (and harder to prove, I suspect), given the lack of pricing data. Of course, this assumes that the price caps were depressing compensation in the first place, another thing we don’t really know. Perhaps going forward new variations on the type of field work done by Rene Almeling could shed some light, at least in terms of whether agency and fertility center professionals continue to talk about donor compensation as if the old guideline prices are some sort of benchmark.

The comments to this entry are closed.


  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad