ЗНАЧЕНИЕ  ИНСТИТУТОВ  ПРАВА  СОБСТВЕННОСТИ   И  ИНФОРМИРОВАННОГО  СОГЛАСИЯ   ПРИ  ИСПОЛЬЗОВАНИИ  БИОЛОГИЧЕСКОГО   МАТЕРИАЛА  ЧЕЛОВЕКА

Anastasia Alexandrovna PESTRIKOVA; Elena Nikolaevna  KHOLOPOVA

doi:10.33184/pravgos-2021.3.10

Authors

Anastasia Alexandrovna PESTRIKOVA Togliatti State University
Elena Nikolaevna KHOLOPOVA Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33184/pravgos-2021.3.10

Keywords:

human biological material, donor, property right, property right to human biological material, informed consent

Abstract

The paper reveals the importance of the institutions of informed consent and property rights in relations with human biological material in the light of the study of foreign legislation and judicial practice. Purpose: to analyze the social relations that arise regarding human biological material through the prism of the institutions of property rights and informed consent for the receipt, storage, transfer and disposal of human biological material. Methods: logical, historical, systemic, structural-functional, comparative, analogies and modeling are used as general scientific research methods, special legal methods are used: formal-legal, comparative-legal, interpretation, legal modeling. Results: the study on the example of court cases considered in the United States concludes that there is a need to adjust domestic law in order to regulate relations and protect the rights of subjects of relations having an impact on human biological material.

Author Biographies

Anastasia Alexandrovna PESTRIKOVA , Togliatti State University

Candidate of Sciences (Law), Associate Professor of the Department of Constitutional and Administrative Law, Togliatti State University, Togliatti, Russia

Elena Nikolaevna KHOLOPOVA , Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University

Doctor of Law, Candidate of Psychological Sciences, Professor, Senior Research Scientist of the Law Institute, Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University, Kaliningrad, Russia

References

Skloot R., The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. New York : Crown Publishers, 2010. 381 p.

Javitt G. Why Not Take All of Me? Reflections on the Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks and the Status of Participants in Research Using Human Specimens // Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology. 2010. № 2. Р. 731–734.

Tindana P., Depuur C., de Vries J., Seeley J., Parker M. Informed consent in genomic research and biobanking: taking feedback of findings seriously // Global Bioethics. 2020. № 31. P. 200–215. URL: https://www.tand¬fonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/11287462.2020.1717896.

Harmon A. Indian Tribe Wins Fight to Limit Research of Its DNA // New York Times. 2010. April 21.

Goodwin M. Altruism’s Limits: Law, Capacity, and Organ Commodification // Rutgers Law Review. 2004. № 2. Р. 361.

Suter S. Did You Give the Government Your Baby’s DNA? Rethinking Consent in Newborn Screening // Minnesota Journal of Health Law, Science & Technology. 2014. № 2. Р. 729–790.

Lewis M.H. et al. State Laws Regarding the Retention and Use of Residual Newborn Screening Blood Samples // Pediatrics. 2011. № 4. Р. 703–712.

Rao R. Coercion, Commercialization, and Commodification: The Ethics of Compensation for Egg Donors in Stem Cell Research // Berkeley Technology Law Journal. 2006. № 3. Р. 1055–1066.

Bailey E. Wilson Signs Bill Making Theft of Human Eggs a Crime // LA Times. 1996. September 26.

Chrysler D., McGee H., Bach J., Goldman E., Jacobson P. The Michigan Biotrust for Health: Using Dried Bloodspots for Research to Benefit the Community While Respecting the Individual // Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. 2011. № 1. Р. 98–101.