Skip header and navigation

Refine By

40 records – page 1 of 4.

Source
Transplant Proc. 1992 Oct;24(5):2218-20
Publication Type
Article
Date
Oct-1992

Anencephalic infants as organ sources: should the law be changed? Yes--the law on anencephalic infants as organ sources should be changed.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature229854
Source
J Pediatr. 1989 Nov;115(5 Pt 1):824-8
Publication Type
Article
Date
Nov-1989
Author
J W Walters
Author Affiliation
Ethics Center, Loma Linda University, CA 92350.
Source
J Pediatr. 1989 Nov;115(5 Pt 1):824-8
Date
Nov-1989
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Anencephaly
Canada
Death
Ethics, Medical
Humans
Infant, Newborn
Social Justice - legislation & jurisprudence
Tissue Donors - legislation & jurisprudence
Tissue and Organ Procurement - legislation & jurisprudence
United States
Notes
Comment In: J Pediatr. 1990 Jul;117(1 Pt 1):164-52370604
PubMed ID
2809918 View in PubMed
Less detail

Anonymity in connection with sperm donation.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature77668
Source
Med Law. 2007 Mar;26(1):137-43
Publication Type
Article
Date
Mar-2007
Author
Jørgensen H K
Hartling O J
Author Affiliation
The Danish Council of Ethics, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Source
Med Law. 2007 Mar;26(1):137-43
Date
Mar-2007
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Confidentiality - legislation & jurisprudence
Denmark
Humans
Male
Spermatozoa
Tissue Donors - legislation & jurisprudence
Abstract
Since Sweden abolished anonymity in connection with sperm donation in 1985, a number of other countries have followed suit. A legal provision still exists in Denmark to the effect that the donor must be anonymous. Arguments given in a Danish context against retaining the present scheme involving anonymous sperm donation will be discussed. The biggest problem with sperm donation seems to be non-disclosure. Current and important arguments in favour ofabolishing anonymity are that it sends out a clear signal that non-disclosure is unacceptable and that, in principle, all citizens should have access to the information available about themselves. However, the arguments can be criticised both from theoretical (legal) and several practical (medical) points of view. A substantive alternative to abolishing anonymity might be to inform parents about avoiding non-disclosure--and to design information material for the children, to support the parents.
PubMed ID
17511415 View in PubMed
Less detail

[Attitude of the population to organ transplantation]

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature73179
Source
Ugeskr Laeger. 1994 May 9;156(19):2869-72
Publication Type
Article
Date
May-9-1994
Author
S. Keiding
S L Jensen
H. Vilstrup
Author Affiliation
Arhus Kommunehospital, transplantationscentret.
Source
Ugeskr Laeger. 1994 May 9;156(19):2869-72
Date
May-9-1994
Language
Danish
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Aged
Denmark
English Abstract
Female
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Organ Transplantation - psychology
Public Opinion
Questionnaires
Tissue Donors - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Tissue and Organ Procurement
Abstract
The attitude of the Danish population towards organ transplantation was examined by means of an interview study, executed by the Gallup Institute. From a sample population of 1391 persons above 18 years of age, 798 persons (70%) were interviewed, in the period April 24th to May 3rd 1992. When asked what they thought the general attitude toward transplantation was amongst the population, 65% answered "positive" or "very positive". The attitudes to three situations, namely to organ donation after the death of a parent, spouse or child was examined subsequently. Amongst those who had an opinion, 75% (72-76%) were positive and 25% (24-27%) were negative. The younger the interviewed person, the more positive the attitude. According to the Danish law the relatives can decide for or against organ donation if the deceased has not expressed her view on organ donation. In view of the general positive attitude of the population it is proposed that we introduce a system where every adult person is asked concerning his/her attitude, e.g. in connection with the yearly income tax form or renewal of the health insurance certificate.
PubMed ID
8009722 View in PubMed
Less detail

Attitudes about donor information differ greatly between IVF couples using their own gametes and those receiving or donating oocytes or sperm.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature280849
Source
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016 Jun;33(6):703-10
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jun-2016
Author
Agneta Skoog Svanberg
G. Sydsjö
M. Bladh
C. Lampic
Source
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016 Jun;33(6):703-10
Date
Jun-2016
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Access to Information - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Adolescent
Adult
Attitude
Family Characteristics
Female
Fertilization in Vitro - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Humans
Longitudinal Studies
Male
Oocyte Donation - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Spermatozoa
Sweden
Tissue Donors - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Abstract
The objective of the study is to examine attitudes towards aspects of donation treatment based on a national Swedish sample of gamete donors and couples undergoing assisted reproductive techniques (ART).
The present study was part of the Swedish study on gamete donation, a prospective longitudinal cohort study including all fertility clinics performing gamete donation in Sweden. The sample comprised 164 oocyte donors, 89 sperm donors, 251 people treated with their own gametes (in vitro fertilisation (IVF)), 213 oocyte recipients and 487 sperm recipients. A study-specific questionnaire was used.
Attitudes vary widely between couples using their own gametes for IVF and those receiving or donating oocyte or sperm. The groups differed in their responses to most questions. Oocyte and sperm donors were more likely to agree with the statements "The donor should be informed if the donation results in a child" and "Offspring should receive some information about the donor during mature adolescence" than recipients of donated gametes and couples treated with their own gametes.
Donor recipients, IVF couples and donors expressed different attitudes towards openness and information when it came to gamete donation, and those differences seemed to depend on their current reproductive situation.
Notes
Cites: Med J Aust. 2003 Feb 3;178(3):127-912558484
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2013 Sep;28(9):2432-923756704
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2004 Oct;19(10):2415-915310730
Cites: Public Underst Sci. 2009 Jan;18(1):61-7719579535
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2009 Aug;24(8):1930-819414865
Cites: Ups J Med Sci. 2013 Aug;118(3):187-9523786323
Cites: J Assist Reprod Genet. 2009 May;26(5):231-819472047
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2008 Apr;23(4):904-1118258766
Cites: Psychol Health. 2011 Sep;26(9):1113-2721929476
PubMed ID
27059774 View in PubMed
Less detail

Bioethics for clinicians: 24. Brain death.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature195197
Source
CMAJ. 2001 Mar 20;164(6):833-6
Publication Type
Article
Date
Mar-20-2001
Author
N M Lazar
S. Shemie
G C Webster
B M Dickens
Author Affiliation
Faculty of Medicine and Joint Centre for Bioethics, University Health Network and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont. neil.lazar@uhn.on.ca
Source
CMAJ. 2001 Mar 20;164(6):833-6
Date
Mar-20-2001
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Brain Death - diagnosis - legislation & jurisprudence
Canada
Child, Preschool
Ethics, Medical
Humans
Male
Physician's Role
Religion and Medicine
Social Values
Tissue Donors - legislation & jurisprudence
Abstract
Brain death is defined as the complete and irreversible absence of all brain function. It is diagnosed by means of rigorous testing at the bedside. The advent of neurologic or brain death criteria to establish the death of a person was a significant departure from the traditional way of defining death and remains ethically challenging to some. We review the ethical, cultural, religious and legal issues surrounding brain death and outline an approach to establishing a diagnosis of brain death in clinical practice.
Notes
Cites: Crit Care Clin. 1985 Jul;1(2):375-963916786
Cites: Presse Med. 1959 Jan 17;67(3):87-813633814
Cites: BMJ. 1999 Jun 26;318(7200):175510428564
Cites: JAMA. 1981 Nov 13;246(19):2184-67289009
Cites: JAMA. 1982 Sep 3;248(9):1089-917109202
Cites: Arch Neurol. 1987 Jun;44(6):587-83579675
Cites: JAMA. 1988 Aug 12;260(6):816-223392814
Cites: Ann R Coll Physicians Surg Can. 1995 Feb;28(1):30-415586966
Cites: Neurology. 1995 May;45(5):1012-47746374
Cites: J R Coll Physicians Lond. 1995 Sep-Oct;29(5):381-28847677
Cites: Semin Neurol. 1997;17(3):265-709311069
Cites: Anesthesiology. 1997 Sep;87(3):676-869316975
Cites: Can J Neurol Sci. 1999 Feb;26(1):64-610068812
Comment In: CMAJ. 2001 Aug 7;165(3):26911517636
Comment In: CMAJ. 2001 Aug 7;165(3):26911517635
Comment In: CMAJ. 2001 Aug 7;165(3):26911517634
PubMed ID
11276553 View in PubMed
Less detail

Biosamples, genomics, and human rights: context and content of Iceland's Biobanks Act.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature187002
Source
J Biolaw Bus. 2001;4(2):11-7
Publication Type
Article
Date
2001
Author
D E Winickoff
Author Affiliation
Harvard Law School, USA.
Source
J Biolaw Bus. 2001;4(2):11-7
Date
2001
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Blood Specimen Collection - ethics
Databases as Topic - ethics - legislation & jurisprudence - standards
Databases, Nucleic Acid - ethics - legislation & jurisprudence - standards
Genetic Privacy - ethics - legislation & jurisprudence
Genetic Research - ethics - legislation & jurisprudence
Human Rights - legislation & jurisprudence
Humans
Iceland
Informed Consent - ethics - legislation & jurisprudence
Legislation as Topic
Medical Records
Preservation, Biological
Presumed Consent - ethics - legislation & jurisprudence
Tissue Donors - legislation & jurisprudence
Abstract
In recent years, human DNA sampling and collection has accelerated without the development of enforceable rules protecting the human rights of donors. The need for regulation of biobanking is especially acute in Iceland, whose parliament has granted a for-profit corporation, deCODE Genetics, an exclusive license to create a centralized database of health records for studies on human genetic variation. Until recently, how deCODE Genetics would get genetic material for its genotypic-phenotypic database remained unclear. However, in May 2000, the Icelandic Parliament passed the Icelandic Biobanks Act, the world's earliest attempt to construct binding rules for the use of biobanks in scientific research. Unfortunately, Iceland has lost an opportunity for bringing clear and ethically sound standards to the use of human biological samples in deCODE's database and in other projects: the Biobanks Act has extended a notion of "presumed consent" from the use of medical records to the use of patients' biological samples; worse, the act has made it possible--perhaps likely--that a donor's wish to withdraw his/her sample will be ignored. Inadequacies in the Act's legislative process help account for these deficiencies in the protection of donor autonomy.
PubMed ID
12530389 View in PubMed
Less detail

Consistency and privacy: do these legal principles mandate gamete donor anonymity?

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature175952
Source
Health Law Rev. 2003;12(1):39-45
Publication Type
Article
Date
2003
Author
Lisa Shields
Author Affiliation
Reproductive Ethics and Policy Project, John Dossetor Health Ethics Centre, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Source
Health Law Rev. 2003;12(1):39-45
Date
2003
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Access to Information - ethics
Canada
Child
Child Advocacy
Female
Humans
Legislation, Medical
Male
Oocyte Donation - legislation & jurisprudence
Pedigree
Privacy - legislation & jurisprudence
Spermatozoa
Tissue Donors - legislation & jurisprudence
PubMed ID
15742496 View in PubMed
Less detail

40 records – page 1 of 4.