Biobank donation in search of public benefits and the potential impact of intellectual property rights over access to health-technologies developed: A focus on the bioethical implications

被引:1
作者
Mcmahon, Aisling M. [1 ]
Kolawole, Opeyemi, I [1 ]
机构
[1] Maynooth Univ, Sch Law & Criminol, Maynooth, Kildare, Ireland
基金
欧洲研究理事会;
关键词
Biobank; Bioethics; Informed Consent; Intellectual Property; CONSENT; PERCEPTIONS; ATTITUDES; PARTICIPATION; COMMERCIALIZATION; PERSPECTIVES; OPINIONS; AUTONOMY; DIGNITY; TRUST;
D O I
10.1093/medlaw/fwae010
中图分类号
D9 [法律]; DF [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
The availability of biomaterials is a key component of health research and the development of new health-technologies (including, diagnostics, medicines, and vaccines). People are often encouraged by biobanks to donate samples altruistically to such biobanks. While empirical evidence suggests many donors are motivated by the desire to contribute towards developing new health-technologies for society. However, a tension can arise as health-technologies whose development is contributed to by donors' biomaterials will often be protected by intellectual property rights (IPRs), including patents. Patents give rightsholders control over how patented technologies are used and can be used in a way that impedes public access to technologies developed. Yet, there are no binding European legal obligations mandating disclosure to donors of how IPRs can operate over downstream health-technologies and how they could impact access to health-technologies developed, nor are there legally binding obligations to ensure public accessibility of technologies developed. Focusing on the bioethical implications posed, this article argues that the current situation can impact donors' autonomy and dignity interests. A more holistic approach is needed for biobank donation, which embeds a consideration of donors' expectations/interests from the point of donation through to how such samples are used and how health-technologies developed are accessed. We put forward avenues that seek to address such issues.
引用
收藏
页码:205 / 228
页数:25
相关论文
共 133 条
  • [11] RESPONSIVENESS AND THE ROLE OF RIGHTS IN MEDICAL LAW: LESSONS FROM MONTGOMERY
    Arvind, T. T.
    McMahon, Aisling M.
    [J]. MEDICAL LAW REVIEW, 2020, 28 (03) : 445 - 477
  • [12] Is Patent "Evergreening" Restricting Access to Medicine/Device Combination Products?
    Beall, Reed F.
    Nickerson, Jason W.
    Kaplan, Warren A.
    Attaran, Amir
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2016, 11 (02):
  • [13] Beauchamp Tom L., 2019, Principles of biomedical ethics, V8
  • [14] Belisle J., 2013, U C IRVINE L REV, V3, P767
  • [15] Belisle JoAnne, 2013, UC IRVINE LAW REV, V3, P771
  • [16] The Use of Human Tissues for Research: What Investigators Need to Know
    Bledsoe, Marianna J.
    Grizzle, William E.
    [J]. ATLA-ALTERNATIVES TO LABORATORY ANIMALS, 2022, 50 (04): : 265 - 274
  • [17] The Concept of Autonomy and Its Role in Kantian Ethics
    Brassington, Iain
    [J]. CAMBRIDGE QUARTERLY OF HEALTHCARE ETHICS, 2012, 21 (02) : 166 - 176
  • [18] Cancer Patient Perceptions about Biobanking and Preferred Timing of Consent
    Braun, Kathryn L.
    Tsark, JoAnn U.
    Powers, Amy
    Croom, Kristen
    Kim, Robert
    Gachupin, Francine C.
    Morris, Paul
    [J]. BIOPRESERVATION AND BIOBANKING, 2014, 12 (02) : 106 - 112
  • [19] Brownsword Roger, 2006, ETHICS LAW INTELLECT
  • [20] Ethical aspects of human biobanks: a systematic review
    Budimir, Danijela
    Polasek, Ozren
    Marusic, Ana
    Kolcic, Ivana
    Zemunik, Tatijana
    Boraska, Vesna
    Jeroncic, Ana
    Boban, Mladen
    Campbell, Harry
    Rudan, Igor
    [J]. CROATIAN MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2011, 52 (03) : 262 - 279