Literature DB >> 26767476

Recognizing the Right Not to Know: Conceptual, Professional, and Legal Implications.

Graeme Laurie1.   

Abstract

This article argues for the importance of conceptual clarity in the debate about the so-called right not to know. This is vital both at the theoretical and the practical level. It is suggested that, unlike many formulations and attempts to give effect to this right, what is at stake is not merely an aspect of personal autonomy and therefore cannot and should not be reduced only to a question of individual choice. Rather, it is argued that the core interests that can be protected by the right not to know are better conceived of as privacy interests rather than autonomy interests. This not only helps us to understand what is in play but also informs regulatory, professional, and legal responses to handling information and taking decisions about whether or not to disclose information to persons about themselves. The practical implications of this conceptualization are explored in the context of feedback policies in health-related research.
© 2014 American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 26767476     DOI: 10.1111/jlme.12118

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Law Med Ethics        ISSN: 1073-1105            Impact factor:   1.718


  13 in total

1.  Preserving children's fertility: two tales about children's right to an open future and the margins of parental obligations.

Authors:  Daniela Cutas; Kristien Hens
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2015-05

Review 2.  Ethical Design of Intelligent Assistive Technologies for Dementia: A Descriptive Review.

Authors:  Marcello Ienca; Tenzin Wangmo; Fabrice Jotterand; Reto W Kressig; Bernice Elger
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2017-09-22       Impact factor: 3.525

3.  A Duty To Warn Relatives in Clinical Genetics: Arguably 'Fair just and reasonable' in English Law?

Authors:  C Mitchell; M C Ploem; R C M Hennekam; J Kaye
Journal:  Tottels J Prof Neglig       Date:  2016-07

4.  The Ethics of General Population Preventive Genomic Sequencing: Rights and Social Justice.

Authors:  Clair Morrissey; Rebecca L Walker
Journal:  J Med Philos       Date:  2018-01-12

5.  Health research participants' preferences for receiving research results.

Authors:  Christopher R Long; M Kathryn Stewart; Thomas V Cunningham; T Scott Warmack; Pearl A McElfish
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2016-08-24       Impact factor: 2.486

6.  Physicians' duty to recontact and update genetic advice.

Authors:  Yvonne A Stevens; Grant D Senner; Gary E Marchant
Journal:  Per Med       Date:  2017-06-08       Impact factor: 2.512

Review 7.  Discouraging Elective Genetic Testing of Minors: A Norm under Siege in a New Era of Genomic Medicine.

Authors:  Laura Hercher
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 6.915

Review 8.  Between Openness and Privacy in Genomics.

Authors:  Effy Vayena; Urs Gasser
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 11.069

9.  Health research participants are not receiving research results: a collaborative solution is needed.

Authors:  Christopher R Long; M Kathryn Stewart; Pearl A McElfish
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2017-10-02       Impact factor: 2.279

10.  The right not to know and the obligation to know.

Authors:  Ben Davies
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2020-04-29       Impact factor: 5.926

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.