The use and control and heel prick blood samples

Medicine and Law

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 259-277

  Thomas, C ^a  

^a MASSEY UNIVERSITY   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Consent; Ethics; Guthrie test; Heel prick test; Human body; Property; Research

Indexed keywords

ANONYMOUS TESTING; ARTICLE; AUTOPSY; BLOOD SAMPLING; CADAVER IDENTIFICATION; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CRIME; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DNA DETERMINATION; GENETIC DISORDER; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; LAW ENFORCEMENT; LEGAL ASPECT; NEW ZEALAND; NEWBORN SCREENING; PATENT; PREDICTION; PRIVACY; RESEARCH ETHICS;

EID: 22644441984     PISSN: 07231393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. K. Elkin and D. G. Jones "Guthrie Cards: legal and ethical issues" (2000) 1 New Zealand Bioethics Journal 22; Privacy Commissioner, Guthrie tests: Privacy Commissioner's Report (2003).
2. Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Act 2004.
3. Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers' Rights 1996 Right 7(10).
4. R v Sharpe (1857) 169 All ER 959.
5. Doodewood v Spence (1908) 6 CLR 406.
6. Lawrence C. Becker Property Rights: Philosophic Foundations (Routledge and K Paul, London, 1977);
7. J E Penner "The "Bundle of Rights" Picture of Property" (1996) 43 UCLA Law Review 711;
8. Tony Honoré Making Law Bind: Essays Legal and Philosophical(Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1987);
9. Wesley Hohfeld "Fundamental Legal conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning" (1913) 23 Yale Law Journal 16.
10. Lawrence C. Becker Property Rights: Philosophic Foundations (Routledge and K Paul, London, 1977) 19.
11. I b i d. at 20.
12. I b i d. at 22.
13. Moore v Regents of the University of California 202 Cal. App. 3d 1230 Cal. Reptr. 494 (Cal. Ct. App.) 252 Cal. Reptr, 816, 763, P.2d, 479 (1988).
14. I b i d. at 504.
15. I b i d. at 510.
16. Moore v Regents of the University of California 51 Cal.3d 120 271 Cal. Reptr. 146, 793, P. 2d, 479, 479-97 (Cal. 1990).
17. I b i d.
18. Miles Inc. v Scripps Clinic and Research Foundation 951 F.2d 361 (9th Cir. 1991); United States v Arora 860 F. Supp 1091, 1093 (D. Md. 1994); Cornelio v Stamford Hospital 1997 WL 430619 (Conn. Super. Ct. July 21 1997) aff'd by 717 A.2d 140 (Conn. 1998); Greenberg and others v Miami Hospital Research Institute and others 264 F. Supp. 2d 1064; 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8959; 16 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 417. 860 F. Supp 1091, 1093 (D. Md. 1994); Cornelio v Stamford Hospital 1997 WL 430619 (Conn. Super. Ct. July 21 1997) aff'd by 717 A.2d 140 (Conn. 1998); Greenberg and others v Miami Hospital Research Institute and others 264 F. Supp. 2d 1064; 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8959; 16 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 417.
19. The Code is set out in the Schedule to the Health and Disability Commissioner (Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers' Rights) Regulations 1996.
20. Clause 3 of the Code.
21. Privacy Commissioner, Guthrie tests: Privacy Commissioner's Report (2003) 5.
22. Nuffield Council on Bioethics Human Tissue: Ethical and Legal Issues(Nuffield Council on Bioethics, London, 1995) 9.11.
23. Adam Stone "The Strange Case of John Moore and the Splendid Stolen Spleen" (1996) available at http://socrates.berkeley.edu:4050/moore.html (last accessed 10 December 2004).
24. Jean McHale "Waste Ownership and Bodily Products" (2000) 8 Health Care Analysis 123.
25. Arthur L. Caplin "Blood, Sweat, Tears, and Profits: The Ethics of the Sale and Use of Patient Derived Materials in Biomedicine" (1985) 33 Clinical Res. 448, 450 "[I]n the area of commercial biotechnology...the biological materials involved are almost always replenishable and often constitute waste materials, at least from the point of view of the donor."
26. Bernard M. Dickens "The Control of Living Body Materials" (1977) 27 University of Toronto Law Journal 142, 183.
27. Nuffield Council on Bioethics Human tissue: ethical and legal issues (Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 1995).
28. R. D. Start et al "Ownership and uses of human tissue: Does the Nuffield bioethics report accord with opinion of surgical inpatients?"(1996) 313 British Medical Journal 1366-1368.
29. H v G unreported High Court, Auckland, Salmon J, 14 May 1999, M. 1868/98.
30. I b i d. at 5.
31. H v G (2000)18 FRNZ 572.
32. Author's personal experience following three births. The only information provided was a nurse's cheerful statement: "Just a little prick." In addition to the blood samples, the cards and/or associated forms also contain information about the baby and often the mother for identification (name of baby and mother, baby's sex, date of birth) as well as sample details, hospital of birth, the referring health care giver. There is also variable other information, such as birth weight and mode of feeding, specifically related to interpretation of the test results.
33. Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Act 2004 s 112ZF.
34. CAB Min (03) 40/88 December 2003.
35. Ministry of Health Operational Standard for Ethics Committees (2002) available at http://www.moh.govt.nz last accessed 1 January 2005).
36. Privacy Commissioner, Guthrie tests: Privacy Commissioner's Report (2003).
37. Human Genetics Society of Australasia and the Division of Paediatrics of the Royal Australasian College of Physicians Policy Statement on the Retention, Storage and Use of Sample Cards from Newborn Screening Programs available at http://www.hgsa.com.au (last accessed 24 October 2004). Australasian College of Physicians Policy Statement on the Retention, Storage and Use of Sample Cards from Newborn Screening Programs available at (last accessed 24 October)
38. J.F. Lucey "Comments on a sudden death article in another journal" (1999) 103 Paediatrics 812.
39. S. Chen et al "KCNQ1 mutations in patients with a family history of lethal cardiac arrhythmias and sudden death" (2003) 63 Clinical Genetics 273.
40. Council of Europe Instrument on the use of archived human biological materials in biomedical research (2002) available at http://www.coe.int. (Last accessed 16 April 2004). The proposal was approved on 20 June 2003. Research available at (Last accessed 16 April 2004). The proposal was approved on 20 June 2003.
41. C. Trouet "New European guidelines for the use of stored human biological materials in biomedical research" (2004) 30 Journal of Medical Ethics 99.
42. I b i d. at 100.
43. G. Laurie Genetic Privacy (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002).
44. I. Ellis and G. Mannion "Humanity versus utility in the ethics of research on human genetic material" (2001) 1 Genetics Law Monitor 1.
45. Council of Europe Recommendation on the Protection of Medical Data (1997) No R 81, 1.
46. P. W. Roche, L. H. Glantz, and G. J. Annas " The Genetic Privacy Act: a proposal for legislation (1996) 37 Jurimetrics 1.
47. R v Department of Health, ex parte Source Infomatics Ltd [2000] 1 All ER 786.
48. World Health Organisation and European Partnership on Patient's Rights and Citizen's Empowerment 2001 para. 4.2.
49. E Marshall "Policy on DNA Research Troubles Tissue bankers"(1996) 271 Science 440.
50. L. Andrews and D. Nelkin Body Bazaar (Crown Publishers, New York, 2001).
51. C. Johnston and J Kaye "Does UK Biobank have a Legal Obligation to Feedback Individual Findings to Participants?" (2004) 12 Medical Law Review 239-267.
52. In New Zealand the Greenlane hospital heart library containing children's hearts retained after autopsy caused an outcry of indignation from bereaved parents.
53. William Boulier "Sperm, Spleens and Other Valuables: The Need to Recognize Property Rights in Human Body Parts" (1995) 23 Hostra Law Review 693, 715.