GPs’ representatives voted overwhelmingly this week for a system in which patients opt in to any sharing of medical data with third parties—rather than one in which their consent is assumed unless they opt out, the system favoured by the Department of Health. Clinical confidentiality depends on GPs being the prime data holder of their patients’ medical records, said the BMA’s annual conference of local medical committee representatives in London. It also strongly opposed using implied consent as justification for releasing information on named patients.
Cash incentives and the payment of funeral expenses are two ideas being put forward to encourage people to donate human organs and tissue. The Nuffield Council on Bioethics is asking the public if it is ethical to use financial incentives to increase donations of organs, eggs and sperm. Paying for most types of organs and tissue is illegal in the UK. The public consultation will last 12 weeks and the council's findings will be published in autumn 2011.
We provide our bodies or parts of our bodies for medical research or for the treatment of others in a number of ways and for a variety of reasons. However, there is a shortage of bodily material for many of these purposes in the UK. What should be done about it? The Council has set up a Working Party, chaired by Professor Dame Marilyn Strathern, to explore the ethical issues raised by the provision of bodily material for medical treatment and research. Questions to be considered include: * what motivates people to provide bodily material and what inducements or incentives are appropriate? * what constitutes valid consent? * what future ownership or control people should have over donated materials? * are there ethical limits on how we try to meet demand?
With the capacity of doctors to intervene in pregnancy increasing, the likelihood for conflicts between doctors and hospitals and pregnant women is also increasing. Yet our jurisprudence has failed to clarify the bounds of pregnant women’s autonomy. Indeed, this jurisprudence is marked by confusion, leaving courts in the dark as to how to resolve these conflicts. Therefore, it is useful to carefully enunciate the rights and interests at issue in forced medical care of pregnant women. This includes 1) the distinction between the right to refuse medical care of oneself and the lack of a right to refuse consent to necessary medical care of others, 2) the right not to be forced to rescue others, and 3) the nature of the exceptions to these rights. Careful delineation of these concepts reveals that forced medical care of pregnant women lacks justification when these principles are consistently applied.
A central tenet to much ethical argument within medical law is patient autonomy. Although we have seen a welcome move away from a system governed by largely unchecked paternalism, there is not universal agreement on the direction in which medical law should advance. Competing concerns for greater welfare and individual freedom, complicated by an overarching commitment to value-pluralism, make this a tricky area of policy-development. Furthermore, there are distinct understandings of, and justifications for, different conceptions of autonomy. In this paper, we argue that in response to these issues, there has been a failure by the courts properly to distinguish political concepts of liberty and moral concepts of autonomy.
With the financial support of the Prevention of and Fight against Crime Programme European Commission - Directorate General Home Affairs Home About us Our work Timeline Symposium About the Crime Reports Media Contact Combating trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal Download project flyer here Home Welcome to the homepage of the international research project, 'combating trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal', otherwise known as 'the HOTT project'. This is the first EU-funded project against this 'new' and neglected form of trafficking in human beings. With this project we aim to increase knowledge and information, raise awareness about the crime and to improve its non-legislative response. Who are we? We are a group of enthusiastic researchers who conduct empirical research on this illegal transplant activity worldwide. This website explains who we are and what we do. Our unique timeline illustrates when and where we work. Why does the Europe...