A Sense of Entitlement

Individual vs. Public Interest in Human Tissue

authored by

Nils Hoppe

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.

Organisation(s)

Centre for Ethics and Law in the Life Sciences

Type

Contribution to book/anthology

Pages

53-64

No. of pages

12

Publication date

2011

Publication status

Published

Peer reviewed

Yes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Biomedical Engineering, Information Systems, Public Administration, Safety Research

Sustainable Development Goals

SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being

Electronic version(s)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1673-5_4 (Access: Unknown)