| Literature DB >> 14696619 |
T A Caulfield1, G B Robertson.
Abstract
There is a growing body of literature and commentary analyzing the ethical and public policy concerns associated with xenotransplantation. While this technology holds great promise to provide an almost limitless supply of organs for transplantation, there remains grave concern about possible public health ramifications. As a result, it has been recommended that patients who undergo xenotransplantations will need to agree, inter alia, to a lifetime of close health monitoring, participation in an international database and autopsy upon death. It has been suggested that this agreement would transform the nature of informed consent into a "binding contract." Though such draconian measures are understandable given the magnitude of the risks involved, would existing common law and legislation allow their implementation? This paper analyzes relevant Canadian consent and public health law in the context of the xenotransplantation. Canada is a country with a particularly rich body of informed consent jurisprudence--jurisprudence firmly rooted (rightly or not) in the ethical principle of autonomy. In this climate, many of the suggested monitoring strategies would find little support from Canadian law. Before xenotransplantations proceed, policy makers must be sensitive to the legal barriers which exist to the implementation [of] effective public health measures. Effective surveillance programs will require novel approaches to consent and the enactment of specific public health laws.Entities:
Keywords: Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; Health Care and Public Health; Legal Approach
Mesh:
Year: 2001 PMID: 14696619 DOI: 10.1177/096853320100500201
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Law Int ISSN: 0968-5332