Bad News about Bad News: The Disclosure of Risks to Insurability in Research Consent Processes

Accountability in Research

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 31-44

  Apold, Victoria Smith ^a   Downie, Jocelyn ^a  

^a DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

consent; incidental findings; insurability risks; neuroethics; research ethics

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANADA; ETHICS; HUMAN; INCIDENTAL FINDING; INFORMED CONSENT; INSURANCE; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LEGAL ASPECT; RESEARCH ETHICS; RESEARCH SUBJECT; RISK;

CANADA; ETHICS, RESEARCH; HUMANS; INCIDENTAL FINDINGS; INFORMED CONSENT; INSURANCE COVERAGE; INSURANCE SELECTION BIAS; INSURANCE, LIFE; RESEARCH SUBJECTS; RISK; TRUTH DISCLOSURE;

EID: 79956336680     PISSN: 08989621     EISSN: 15455815     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2011.542681     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Art. 2408 C.C.Q.
2. Blouin v. Maritime Life Assurance Company. (1988). 88 N.S.R. (2d) 23 (T.D.).
3. Cooperants Mutual Life Insurance Society v. Cameron. (1992). 118 N.S.R. (2d) 64 (C.A.).
4. J.F.Dobbyn, 1996. Insurance Law in a Nutshell, 3rd, St. Paul, MN: West Pub. Co.
5. J.Downie,, M.Schmidt,, N.Kenny,, R.D'Arcy,, M.Hadskis, and J.Marshall, 2007. Pediatric MRI research ethics: The priority issues. Bioethical Inquiry, 4: 85 – 91.
6. M.Hadskis, 2007. “ The regulation of human biomedical research in Canada ”. In Canadian Health Law and Policy, 3rd, Toronto: Butterworths.
7. M.Hadskis, and J.Marshall, Scanning the issues: Incidental findings in magnetic resonance imaging research, Manuscript on file with the authors. (Unpublished)
8. Halushka v. University of Saskatchewan. (1965). 53 D.L.R. (2d) 426 (Sask. C.A.).
9. Henwood v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America. (1967). S.C.R. 720.
10. N.Hoggard,, G.Darwent,, D.Capener,, I.D.Wilkinson, and P.D.Griffiths, 2009. The high incidence and bioethics of findings on magnetic resonance brain imaging of normal volunteers for neuroscience research. Journal of Medical Ethics, 35: 194 – 199.
11. Hopp v. Lepp 2 S.C.R. 192 1980
12. J.Illes,, M.P.Kirschen,, E.Edwards,, P.Bandettini,, M.K.Cho,, P.J.Ford,, G.H.Glover,, J.Kulynych,, R.Macklin,, D.B.Michael,, S.M.Wolf,, T.Grabowski, and B.Seto, 2008. Practical approaches to incidental findings in brain imaging research. Neurology, 70 (5): 384 – 390.
13. Insurance Act, R.S.O., c.I.8. (1990). (Can.).
14. Insurance Contracts Act. (1984). (Cth.).
15. M.D.Jensen,, T.Nathan,, J.Kjeldsen, and S.R.Rafaelsen, 2010. Incidental findings at MRI-enterography in patients with suspected or known Crohn's disease. World Journal of Gastroenterology, 16 (1): 76 – 82.
16. Kruska v. The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company. (1985). 63 B.C.L.R. 209 (C.A.).
17. Lafreniere Estate v. Cumis Life Insurance Co. (1997). I.L.R. I-3422 (Ont.Gen.Div.).
18. Marine Insurance Act. (1906). 6 Edw. 7, c.41.
19. J.Marshall, and M.R.Hadskis, 2009. Canadian Research Ethics Boards, MRI Research Risks, and MRI Risk Classification. IRB: Ethics and Human Research, 31 (4): 9 – 15.
20. D.A.McKenna,, M.Laxpati, and P.M.Colletti, 2008. The prevalence of incidental findings at cardiac MRI. The Open Cardiovascular Medicine Journal, 2: 20 – 25.
21. S.H.X.Morin,, J.F.L.Cobbold,, A.K.P.Lim,, J.Eliahoo,, E.L.Thomas,, S.R.Mehta,, G.Durighel,, J.Fitzpatrick,, J.D.Bell, and S.D.Taylor-Robinson, 2009. Incidental findings in health control research subjects using whole-body MRI. European Journal of Radiology, 72: 529 – 533.
22. Z.Morris,, W.N.Whiteley,, W.T.Longstreth,, F.Weber,, Y.Lee,, Y.Tsushima,, H.Alphs,, S.C.Ladd,, C.Warlow,, J.M.Wardlaw, and R.A.Salman, 2009. Incidental findings on brain magnetic resonance imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ, 339: b3016
23. Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Ontario Metal Products Co. (1925). A.C. 344 (P.C.).
24. D.Norwood, and J.P.Weir, 2002. Norwood on Life Insurance Law in Canada, 3rd, Toronto: Carswell.
25. Nuraney v. MBA Insurance Brokers Inc. et al. (1989). I.LR. 1-2439 (Ont. H.C.).
26. E.Picard, and G.Robertson, 1996. Legal Liability of Doctors and Hospitals in Canada, 3rd, Scarborough, ON: Carswell.
27. Reibl v. Hughes. (1980). 2 S.C.R. 880.
28. J.M.Royal, and B.S.Peterson, 2008. The risks and benefits of searching for incidental findings in MRI research scans. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36 (2): 305 – 314.
29. Tanner v. Toronto Dominion Bank. (2002). 212 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 211 (P.E.I.T.D.).
30. Thompson v. Maritime Life Assurance Co. (2004). 190 Man.R. (2d) 130 (C.A.).
31. Title 45 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 46, Subpart A.
32. 1998. Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, Ottawa: Public Works and Government Services Canada.
33. Weiss v. Solomon. (1989) 48 C.C.L.T. 280 (Que. S.C.).
34. S.M.Wolf,, F.P.Lawren,, C.A.Nelson,, J.P.Kahn,, M.K.Cho,, E.W.Clayton,, J.G.Fletcher,, M.K.Georgieff,, D.Hammerschmidt,, K.Hudson,, J.Illes,, V.Kapur,, M.A.Keane,, B.A.Koenig,, B.S.LeRoy,, E.G.McFarland,, J.Paradise,, L.S.Parker,, S.F.Terry,, B.Van Ness, and B.S.Wilfond, 2008. Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: Analysis and recommendations. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36 (2): 219 – 248.
35. Wynter v. Equitable Life Insurance Co. (1976). I.L.R. 1-753 (Ont. H.C.).