Big Biobanks: Three Major Governance Challenges and Some Mini-constitutional Responses

Research Ethics Forum

Volumn 4, Issue , 2016, Pages 175-196

  Brownsword, Roger ^a  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Governance Framework; Public Interest; Reasonable Expectation; Regulative Principle; Tort Model

Indexed keywords

EID: 85103907049     PISSN: 22129529     EISSN: 22129537     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-28731-7_14     Document Type: Chapter

References (47)

1. Bell, J. 1993. Public interest: Policy or principle? In Law and the public interest, ed. R. Brownsword. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.
2. Beskow, L.M., E.E. Namey, R.J. Cadigan, T. Brazg, J. Crouch, G.E. Henderson, et al. 2011. Research Participants’ perspectives on genotype-driven research recruitment. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics 6(4): 3–20.
3. Beyleveld, D. 2006. Conceptualising privacy in relation to medical research values. In First do no harm, ed. S.A.M. McLean, 151–163. Aldershot: Ashgate.
4. Beyleveld, D., and R. Brownsword. 2007. Consent in the law. Oxford: Hart.
5. Beyleveld, D., and R. Brownsword. 2015. Research participants and the right to be informed. In Inspiring a medico-legal revolution: Essays in honour of Sheila McLean, ed. P. Ferguson and G. Laurie. Aldershot: Ashgate.
6. Bovenberg, J., T. Meulenkamp, E. Smets, and S. Gevers. 2009. Always expect the unexpected: Legal and social aspects of reporting biobank research results to individual research participants. Nijmegen: Radboud University, Centre for Society and Genomics.
7. Brownsword, R. (ed.). 1993. Law and the public interest. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.
8. Brownsword, R. 2004. The cult of consent: Fixation and fallacy. Kings College Law Journal 15(2): 223–252.
9. Brownsword, R. 2007. The ancillary care responsibilities of researchers: Reasonable but not great expectations. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 35(4): 679–691.
10. Brownsword, R. 2008. Rights, regulation and the technological revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11. Brownsword, R. 2009. Rights, responsibility and stewardship: Beyond consent. In The governance of genetic information: Who decides? ed. H. Widdows and C. Mullen, 99–125. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. Brownsword, R. 2012a. Guidelines for our genomic futures. Rivista di Medicina 20: 179–188.
13. Brownsword, R. 2012b. Informed consent in the information society. Health Sociology Review XIn3(special issue): 179–206
14. Brownsword, R. 2012c. Regulating brain imaging: Questions of privacy and informed consent. In I know what you are thinking: Brain imaging and mental privacy, ed. Edwards, S.J.L, Richmond, S, and G. Rees. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. Brownsword, R. 2013a. Crimes against humanity, simple crime, and human dignity. In Humanity across international law and biolaw, ed. B. van Beers, L. Corrias, and W. Werner. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16. Brownsword, R. 2013b. Human dignity, human rights, and simply trying to do the right thing. In Understanding human dignity, ed. C. McCrudden, 470–490. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
17. Brownsword, R. 2013c. Regulating biobanks: Another triple bottom line. In Comparative issues in the governance of research biobanks, ed. G. Pascuzzi, U. Izzo, and M. Macilotti, 41–62. Heidelberg: Springer.
18. Brownsword, R., and M. Goodwin. 2012. Law and the technologies of the twenty-first century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19. Capps, B. 2013. Defining variables of access to UK biobank: The public interest and the public good. Law, Innovative Technology 5(1): 113–139.
20. Düwell, M., J. Braavig, R. Brownsword, and D. Mieth. 2014. The Cambridge handbook of human dignity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. European Commission (EC). 2012a. Biobanks for Europe: A challenge for governance . Brussels: European Union.
22. European Commission (EC). 2012b. Regulation of the European parliament and of the council on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data. Brussels: European Parliament.
23. Forgó, N., R. Kollek, M. Arning, T. Kruegel, and I. Petersen. 2010. Ethical and legal requirements for transnational genetic research . Berlin/Oxford: CH Beck with Hart.
24. Forsberg, J.S., and S. Soini. 2014. A big step for Finnish biobanking. Nature Reviews Genetics 15(1): 6.
25. Gliwa, C., and B.E. Berkman. 2013. Do researchers have an obligation to actively look for genetic incidental findings? American Journal of Bioethics 13: 32–42.
26. Heeney, C., and M. Parker. 2012. Ethics and the governance of biobanks: Understanding the interplay between law and practice. In Governing biobanks, ed. J. Kaye, S.M.C. Gibbons, C. Heeney, M. Parker, and A. Smart, 282–301. Oxford: Hart.
27. Human Genomics Strategy Group (HGSG). 2012. Building on our inheritance: Genomic technology in healthcare. London: Human Genomics Strategy Group.
28. Johnston, C., and J. Kaye. 2004. Does the UK biobank have a legal obligation to feedback individual findings to participants? Medical Law Review 12(3): 239–267.
29. Kaye, J., E.A. Whitley, N. Kanellopoulou, S. Creese, K. Hughes, and D. Lund. 2011. Dynamic consent: A solution to a perennial problem? BMJ 343: d6900–d6900.
30. Kaye, J., M. Hurles, H. Griffin, J. Grewal, M. Bobrow, N. Timpson, et al. 2014. Managing clinically significant findings in research: The UK10K example. European Journal of Human Genetics 22(9): 1100–1104.
31. Knoppers, B.M., M. Deschênes, M.H. Zawati, and A.M. Tassé. 2013. Population studies: Return of research results and incidental findings policy statement. European Journal of Human Genetics 21(3): 245–247.
32. Lunshof, J.E., G.M. Church, and B. Prainsack. 2014. Raw personal data: Providing access. Science 343(6169): 373–374.
33. Macilotti, M. 2013. Informed consent and research biobanks: A challenge in three dimensions. In Comparative issues in the governance of research biobanks, ed. G. Pascuzzi, U. Izzo, and M. Macilotti, 143–163. Heidelberg: Springer.
34. Milne, A.J.M. 1993. The public interest, political controversy, and the judges. In Law and the public interest, ed. R. Brownsword. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.
35. Nuffield Council on Bioethics (NCB). 2011. Human bodies: Donation for medicine and research. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.
36. Personal Genome Project: United Kingdom (PGP-UK). 2014. Informed consent for enrolment in the PGP-UK. http://www.personalgenomes.org/static/docs/uk/PGP-UK_FullConsent_06Jun13_ with_amend.pdf. Accessed 15 Feb 2015.
37. Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (PCSBI). 2013. Anticipate and communicate—Ethical management of incidental and secondary findings in the clinical, research, and direct-to-consumer contexts. Washington, DC: PCSBI.
38. Reidenberg, J.R., R. Gellman, J. Debelak, A. Elewa, and N. Liu. 2013. Privacy and missing persons after natural disasters. Washington, DC/New York: Center on Law and Information Policy at Fordham Law School and Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
39. Richardson, H.S. 2012. Moral entanglements: The ancillary-care obligations of medical researchers. New York: Oxford University Press.
40. Sample, I. 2013. Critics urge caution as UK genome project hunts for volunteers . The Guardian, 2013 November 7. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/nov/07/personal-genome-project-uk-launch. Accessed 15 Feb 2015.
41. Soini, S. 2013. Finland on a road towards a modern legal biobanking infrastructure. European Journal of Health Law 20(3): 289–294.
42. Steinsbekk, K.S., B. Kåre Myskja, and B. Solberg. 2013. Broad consent versus dynamic consent in biobank research: Is passive participation an ethical problem? European Journal of Human Genetics 21(9): 897–902.
43. UK Biobank. 2007. Ethics and governance framework of UK biobank. http://www.ukbiobank. ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/EGF20082.pdf. Accessed 15 Feb 2015.
44. UNESCO. 2005. Universal declaration on bioethics and human rights. http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=31058&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html. Accessed 15 Feb 2015.
45. Wellcome Trust and Medical Research Council (WTMRC 2012). 2012. Assessing public attitudes to health related findings in research. London: Opinion Leader.
46. Wolf, S.M., B.N. Crock, B. Van Ness, F. Lawrenz, J.P. Kahn, L.M. Beskow, et al. 2012. Managing incidental findings and research results in genomic research involving biobanks and archived data sets. Genetics in Medicine 14(4): 361–384.
47. World Medical Association (WMA). 2013. Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. 64th WMA General Assembly; Fortaleza, Brazil. http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3. Accessed 15 Feb 2015.