> If a system is broken, how do you fix it?

I’ve been asking this question for years. First as a healthcare technology consultant, now as a law student studying the intersection of intellectual property (IP) and health law.

At Epic, I was part detective, part problem-solver, and part translator. I dove into messy software bugs. I helped clinicians by implementing tools to check insurance coverage in real time. I convinced hospital executives to implement new features that improved patient experience.

One day, I was rolling out a COVID-19 management feature to help hospitals connect patients to care during a time of crisis. On another, I was digging into billing data to automate processes. I made sure that patients were billed correctly, statements went out on time, and insurance follow-up didn’t fall through the cracks. My job was to keep healthcare running smoothly.

I worked to build new systems that helped many patients get better care. But I noticed that many were still left out. Even the best software wouldn’t matter if you couldn’t afford treatment or lacked coverage. The biggest failures in healthcare weren’t just about technology.

They were systemic.

It wasn’t just outdated interfaces or tech glitches blocking care. The real barriers were policies, regulations, and, as I’d later discover, IP laws.

That realization pulled me from fixing code to studying the laws that shape healthcare. Here’s how I made that transition—and why IP law matters for access to healthcare.

> A Critical System Failure: The Moment That Shifted My Perspective

In December 2020, I led a team at Epic preparing to launch a COVID-19 vaccine management system. Just hours before we went live, I got a frantic call:

“Nicole, the system is down. There’s an issue with the records we received from the state. What are we going to do?”

The platform was designed to schedule COVID-19 tests and vaccines. Thousands of patients depended on it. A data formatting error threatened to bring everything to a halt. I worked frantically. First, I isolated the problem. Then, I debugged the system. In the end, everything launched smoothly.

But instead of feeling relieved, I felt frustrated.

Because here’s the thing. The problem wasn’t the technology. It was the system itself.

Why were the systems providing access to life-saving care so fragile? If a tiny glitch could disrupt access to vaccines for thousands of people, what deeper barriers were blocking patients from getting the care they needed?

I spent years thinking better technological systems would fix healthcare. But this wasn’t a problem I could code my way out of. The more I dug, the clearer it became. These barriers weren’t just technical. They were legal.

That’s when it clicked. If I really wanted to fix the system, I needed to understand the laws that shaped it. I needed to study IP, health policy, and regulation—not just technology.

I needed to go to law school.

> Debugging the System: Where IP Law Comes In

I went to law school because I was convinced I could help solve these structural issues. But I soon realized the problems ran even deeper than I ever imagined.

Even the best software couldn’t ensure people could afford or obtain life-saving treatments. The COVID-19 pandemic made that painfully clear. My team’s scheduling system expanded access, but it couldn’t tackle barriers like high drug prices or restrictive patent laws.

At Loyola University Chicago School of Law, I wanted to see how we regulate medical innovation. But it wasn’t until I took Global Access to Medicine: A Patent Perspective  that everything really clicked. That class introduced me to IP law and the many ways it shapes who gets access to medical breakthroughs.

One key debate stood out:

Should governments have the right to override patent exclusivity and allow generic production of medicines during public health crises?

At first, the answer seemed obvious. If lives are at stake, why should a patent block access to a drug? But the deeper I dug, the more complicated it became.

One way to increase access to medicine during a public health crisis is through compulsory licensing, which lets governments temporarily override a patent and authorize generic production of a drug without the patent holder’s consent. International agreements like TRIPS (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) permit countries to grant compulsory licenses. Some countries like India and Brazil have used it to bring down drug prices and increase access.

The U.S. technically has legal pathways to grant compulsory licenses, but using them is highly controversial. The pharmaceutical industry argues that overriding patents too easily discourages private investment in research and development, which drives medical innovation. On the other hand, public health advocates argue that no one should be denied life-saving treatment due to cost.

The more I studied these debates, the clearer it became that IP law isn’t just about protecting ideas.  It’s about structuring access to life-saving treatments and medical innovations. Who benefits from these breakthroughs? Who profits from their development? And how do we encourage innovation without pricing out those who need it most?

These aren’t just academic questions. They’re shaping the future of global healthcare. And for me, they made one thing clear: IP law is just as much a public health issue as it is a legal one.

> Finding the Bug in the System: The Intersection of Health and IP

Now a second-year law student at Loyola, I see IP and healthcare intersect everywhere. AI-driven diagnostics. Biotech patents. Global drug policy. In each case, I come back to the same realization:

IP law is the source code that decides who gets life-saving medical innovations.

Strong patents drive investment in high-risk, high-reward breakthroughs. But without balanced policies, those same breakthroughs become too expensive for the people who need them most.

At Epic, I watched technology act both as a tool for progress and a barrier to care. Now I see IP law doing the same.

> Pushing the Next Update: Where I’m Headed

The future of healthcare depends on innovation. But its impact will be defined by the laws and policies that shape it.

As I continue my legal education, I want to help build a system that balances innovation with access. Whether through patent law, regulation, or AI-driven healthcare, I want to ensure breakthroughs reach the people who need them.

Because medical innovation isn’t just about what we create. It’s about who gets to benefit from it.

 

Nicole Celewicz
Associate Blogger
Loyola University Chicago School of Law, J.D. 2026