A Sense of Entitlement: Individual vs. Public Interest in Human Tissue

Publikation: Beitrag in Buch/Bericht/Sammelwerk/KonferenzbandBeitrag in Buch/SammelwerkForschungPeer-Review

Forschungs-netzwerk anzeigen

Details

OriginalspracheEnglisch
Titel des SammelwerksInternational Library of Ethics, Law and Technology
Herausgeber (Verlag)Springer Science and Business Media B.V.
Seiten53-64
Seitenumfang12
PublikationsstatusVeröffentlicht - 2011

Publikationsreihe

NameInternational Library of Ethics, Law and Technology
Band8
ISSN (Print)1875-0044
ISSN (elektronisch)1875-0036

Abstract

This chapter argues that the balancing exercises undertaken between individual interest and public interest in the context of human material procurement are distorted on the basis of unconvincing arguments. It shows different bases for entitlements and makes a clear distinction between live and post-mortem procurement. The destination of the material is also argued to be of pivotal concern: where the material is used to save a life, where it is used to improve a person’s health and wellbeing and where it is used for (potentially commercial) research – all of these scenarios demand different approaches to procurement governance. The text culminates in the proposal of an initial framework for a three-tiered system. Where the procurement is post-mortem and the material to be procured is necessary to save another’s life, it is argued that there is no justification for withholding the material by means of an inter-vivos arrangement and it should be available without consent. Where the material is taken post-mortem and destined to improve another patient’s health or wellbeing, the current system of free and voluntary donation can remain in place with all its limitations. Finally, where the material is taken from a live source and is required for research purposes, the source should be entitled to stipulate conditions (financial or otherwise) for the excision and further use.

ASJC Scopus Sachgebiete

Ziele für nachhaltige Entwicklung

Zitieren

A Sense of Entitlement: Individual vs. Public Interest in Human Tissue. / Hoppe, Nils.
International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology. Springer Science and Business Media B.V., 2011. S. 53-64 (International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology; Band 8).

Publikation: Beitrag in Buch/Bericht/Sammelwerk/KonferenzbandBeitrag in Buch/SammelwerkForschungPeer-Review

Hoppe, N 2011, A Sense of Entitlement: Individual vs. Public Interest in Human Tissue. in International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology. International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology, Bd. 8, Springer Science and Business Media B.V., S. 53-64. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1673-5_4
Hoppe, N. (2011). A Sense of Entitlement: Individual vs. Public Interest in Human Tissue. In International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology (S. 53-64). (International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology; Band 8). Springer Science and Business Media B.V.. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1673-5_4
Hoppe N. A Sense of Entitlement: Individual vs. Public Interest in Human Tissue. in International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology. Springer Science and Business Media B.V. 2011. S. 53-64. (International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology). doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-1673-5_4
Hoppe, Nils. / A Sense of Entitlement : Individual vs. Public Interest in Human Tissue. International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology. Springer Science and Business Media B.V., 2011. S. 53-64 (International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology).
Download
@inbook{5782270356634e14acc0e1d953712deb,
title = "A Sense of Entitlement: Individual vs. Public Interest in Human Tissue",
abstract = "This chapter argues that the balancing exercises undertaken between individual interest and public interest in the context of human material procurement are distorted on the basis of unconvincing arguments. It shows different bases for entitlements and makes a clear distinction between live and post-mortem procurement. The destination of the material is also argued to be of pivotal concern: where the material is used to save a life, where it is used to improve a person{\textquoteright}s health and wellbeing and where it is used for (potentially commercial) research – all of these scenarios demand different approaches to procurement governance. The text culminates in the proposal of an initial framework for a three-tiered system. Where the procurement is post-mortem and the material to be procured is necessary to save another{\textquoteright}s life, it is argued that there is no justification for withholding the material by means of an inter-vivos arrangement and it should be available without consent. Where the material is taken post-mortem and destined to improve another patient{\textquoteright}s health or wellbeing, the current system of free and voluntary donation can remain in place with all its limitations. Finally, where the material is taken from a live source and is required for research purposes, the source should be entitled to stipulate conditions (financial or otherwise) for the excision and further use.",
keywords = "Cadaveric Donor, Heart Valve, Heart Valve Replacement, Individual Interest, Public Interest",
author = "Nils Hoppe",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2011, Springer Science+Business Media B.V.",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.1007/978-94-007-1673-5_4",
language = "English",
series = "International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology",
publisher = "Springer Science and Business Media B.V.",
pages = "53--64",
booktitle = "International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology",
address = "Germany",

}

Download

TY - CHAP

T1 - A Sense of Entitlement

T2 - Individual vs. Public Interest in Human Tissue

AU - Hoppe, Nils

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2011, Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - This chapter argues that the balancing exercises undertaken between individual interest and public interest in the context of human material procurement are distorted on the basis of unconvincing arguments. It shows different bases for entitlements and makes a clear distinction between live and post-mortem procurement. The destination of the material is also argued to be of pivotal concern: where the material is used to save a life, where it is used to improve a person’s health and wellbeing and where it is used for (potentially commercial) research – all of these scenarios demand different approaches to procurement governance. The text culminates in the proposal of an initial framework for a three-tiered system. Where the procurement is post-mortem and the material to be procured is necessary to save another’s life, it is argued that there is no justification for withholding the material by means of an inter-vivos arrangement and it should be available without consent. Where the material is taken post-mortem and destined to improve another patient’s health or wellbeing, the current system of free and voluntary donation can remain in place with all its limitations. Finally, where the material is taken from a live source and is required for research purposes, the source should be entitled to stipulate conditions (financial or otherwise) for the excision and further use.

AB - This chapter argues that the balancing exercises undertaken between individual interest and public interest in the context of human material procurement are distorted on the basis of unconvincing arguments. It shows different bases for entitlements and makes a clear distinction between live and post-mortem procurement. The destination of the material is also argued to be of pivotal concern: where the material is used to save a life, where it is used to improve a person’s health and wellbeing and where it is used for (potentially commercial) research – all of these scenarios demand different approaches to procurement governance. The text culminates in the proposal of an initial framework for a three-tiered system. Where the procurement is post-mortem and the material to be procured is necessary to save another’s life, it is argued that there is no justification for withholding the material by means of an inter-vivos arrangement and it should be available without consent. Where the material is taken post-mortem and destined to improve another patient’s health or wellbeing, the current system of free and voluntary donation can remain in place with all its limitations. Finally, where the material is taken from a live source and is required for research purposes, the source should be entitled to stipulate conditions (financial or otherwise) for the excision and further use.

KW - Cadaveric Donor

KW - Heart Valve

KW - Heart Valve Replacement

KW - Individual Interest

KW - Public Interest

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84860325181&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/978-94-007-1673-5_4

DO - 10.1007/978-94-007-1673-5_4

M3 - Contribution to book/anthology

AN - SCOPUS:84860325181

T3 - International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology

SP - 53

EP - 64

BT - International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology

PB - Springer Science and Business Media B.V.

ER -

Von denselben Autoren