Atnaujinkite slapukų nuostatas

Self-Ownership, Property Rights, and the Human Body: A Legal and Philosophical Analysis [Kietas viršelis]

(University of Birmingham)
  • Formatas: Hardback, 360 pages, aukštis x plotis x storis: 236x157x23 mm, weight: 620 g
  • Serija: Cambridge Bioethics and Law
  • Išleidimo metai: 19-Apr-2018
  • Leidėjas: Cambridge University Press
  • ISBN-10: 1107036860
  • ISBN-13: 9781107036864
Kitos knygos pagal šią temą:
Self-Ownership, Property Rights, and the Human Body: A Legal and Philosophical AnalysisDidesnis paveikslėlis
  • Formatas: Hardback, 360 pages, aukštis x plotis x storis: 236x157x23 mm, weight: 620 g
  • Serija: Cambridge Bioethics and Law
  • Išleidimo metai: 19-Apr-2018
  • Leidėjas: Cambridge University Press
  • ISBN-10: 1107036860
  • ISBN-13: 9781107036864
Kitos knygos pagal šią temą:
Pastovi nuoroda: https://www.kriso.lt/db/9781107036864.html
Raktažodžiai:
How should the law deal with the challenges raised by advancing biotechnology? This book offers a philosophical and legal re-analysis of the law in relation to property in the body and biomaterials. It will appeal to academics working on issues crossing biotechnology, law, ethics and policy.

How ought the law to deal with novel challenges regarding the use and control of human biomaterials? As it stands the law is ill-equipped to deal with these. Quigley argues that advancing biotechnology means that the law must confront and move boundaries which it has constructed; in particular, those which delineate property from non-property in relation to biomaterials. Drawing together often disparate strands of property discourse, she offers a philosophical and legal re-analysis of the law in relation to property in the body and biomaterials. She advances a new defence, underpinned by self-ownership, of the position that persons ought to be seen as the prima facie holders of property rights in their separated biomaterials. This book will appeal to those interested in medical and property law, philosophy, bioethics, and health policy amongst others.

Recenzijos

'In sum, Quigley's book is a feat of thorough and innovative legal and philosophical argument on a highly topical issue. It is dense and technical without being tedious. Reading it is an immensely rewarding endeavour.' Barbara Prainsack, Medical Law Review

Daugiau informacijos

How should the law deal with the challenges of advancing biotechnology? This book is a philosophical and legal re-analysis.
Acknowledgements xii
Table of Cases
xiv
Table of Legislation
xvii
1 Bodies of Value
1(20)
1 Introduction
1(1)
2 On Control and Conflict
2(7)
2.1 Immortal Cell Lines and Antibodies
2(2)
2.2 Spleens, Genes, and Prostates
4(4)
2.3 Sperm as Property
8(1)
3 Uses and Values of Biomaterials
9(8)
4 Structure of the Book
17(4)
PART I Human Tissues and the Law
21(104)
2 Regulating the Uses of Biomaterials: Consent and Authorisation
23(32)
1 Introduction
23(1)
2 Human Tissue Regulation: Historical Failures
23(5)
3 The Human Tissue Acts: Filling Regulatory Gaps?
28(17)
3.1 The English Act: Consent
28(12)
3.2 The Scottish Act: Authorisation
40(2)
3.3 Is There a Relevant Difference?
42(3)
4 Consent: Problems of Principle
45(8)
4.1 The Basis of Consent?
46(4)
4.2 Against Free-standing Consent
50(3)
5 Concluding Remarks: Biomaterials and Consent
53(2)
3 Property in the Body?
55(41)
1 Introduction
55(1)
2 `No Property' and Creating Exceptions
56(9)
2.1 Origins and Early Difficulties
56(4)
2.2 Exceptions and the Application of Skill
60(5)
3 Materials of Uncertain Significance
65(4)
4 Lessons from Abroad?
69(6)
4.1 Control and Conflict Revisited
69(3)
4.2 Other Dilemmas
72(3)
5 Transforming Tissues I: Work, Skill, and Labour
75(8)
5.1 Locke's Labour Lost
76(4)
5.2 Labouring and Provisos
80(3)
6 Transforming Tissues II: Accession and Specification
83(11)
6.1 Potential Applications
86(4)
6.2 Some Stumbling Blocks
90(4)
7 Concluding Remarks: Problematic Property Principles
94(2)
4 A Property (r)Evolution?
96(29)
1 Introduction
96(1)
2 Yearworth and Ownership of Sperm Samples
96(9)
2.1 Property Not Personal Injury
97(6)
2.2 Narrow Scope and Shaky Foundations?
103(2)
3 Sperm in Australia and Canada
105(6)
3.1 Acting as Agents
105(4)
3.2 Further Disputes over Sperm
109(2)
4 Putting a Kilt on Yearworth?
111(6)
4.1 Circumscribing Ownership?
113(2)
4.2 Possession and Ownership
115(2)
5 Transforming Tissues Revisited
117(5)
5.1 Use Beyond Mere Existence
117(2)
5.2 Intention and Future Use
119(3)
6 Concluding Thoughts: Towards Separation?
122(3)
PART II Property and Persons
125(106)
5 What Is Property? I: Bundles and Things
127(33)
1 Introduction
127(2)
2 Property, Persons, and Things
129(16)
2.1 Things, Objects, and Biomaterials
129(5)
2.2 Rights, Relations, and Metaphors
134(4)
2.3 Constructing Useful Bundles
138(4)
2.4 A Bundle of Problems: Theoretical and Practical Issues
142(3)
3 Exclusion, Non-interference, and Property Forms
145(8)
3.1 Protecting Property
146(5)
3.2 Restricting Property Forms
151(2)
4 Beyond Exclusion: Controlling the Uses of Things
153(5)
5 Conclusion
158(2)
6 What Is Property? II: Rights and Interests
160(34)
1 Introduction
160(1)
2 Property Interests
161(5)
3 What Does It Mean to Have a Property Right?
166(10)
3.1 Rights as Structurally Complex
167(5)
3.2 From Property Interests to Property Rights
172(4)
4 Property and Sperm Revisited
176(4)
5 Property, Possession, and Ownership
180(11)
5.1 Better Rights of Possession
181(3)
5.2 Being `the Owner'
184(4)
5.3 Ownership as Normative Authority
188(3)
6 Concluding Remarks
191(3)
7 The Scope and Bounds of Self-ownership
194(37)
1 Introduction
194(1)
2 Embodied Persons as Self-owners
195(6)
3 Self-ownership Interests and Autonomy
201(9)
3.1 Liberty and Non-interference
201(3)
3.2 Beyond Non-interference: Being the Source of Normative Authority
204(3)
3.3 Liberty, Moral Autonomy, and Public Reason
207(3)
4 Self-ownership, Autonomy, and Equality
210(8)
4.1 Rights Restrictions and Autonomy Maximisation
211(3)
4.2 Self-owners as Moral Equals
214(4)
5 Conceptual and Normative Issues
218(11)
5.1 The Indeterminacy of Self-ownership Rights?
219(1)
5.2 Neither Necessary nor Desirable?
220(5)
5.3 Persons as Property?
225(4)
6 Concluding Thoughts
229(2)
PART III Beyond Self-ownership
231(78)
8 Property Rights in Biomaterials
233(31)
1 Introduction
233(1)
2 Self-ownership and Continuing Normative Authority
234(8)
2.1 The `No Moral Magic' Principle
234(2)
2.2 Normative Continuity: Some Possible Objections
236(6)
3 Bodies, Biomaterials, and Law's Boundary-Work
242(13)
3.1 Probing Property's Boundaries I: Organs and Other Biomaterials
245(6)
3.2 Probing Property's Boundaries II: Everyday Cyborgs
251(4)
4 Biomaterials as the Fruits of Our Labour?
255(7)
5 Concluding Remarks
262(2)
9 Transferring Bodily Property
264(36)
1 Introduction
264(1)
2 Consent and Property: Re-orienting the Normative Touchstone
265(9)
2.1 Legitimating the Use and Transfer of Biomaterials
267(4)
2.2 Some Observations and Implications
271(3)
3 Abandonment and Gratuitous Transfers
274(13)
3.1 Abandoning Our Biomaterials?
274(4)
3.2 Donations and Bailments
278(5)
3.3 Trusts and Biorepositories
283(4)
4 Transfers for Value: On Property Rights and Income Rights
287(11)
4.1 Property, Persons, and Commercialisation
288(6)
4.2 Wrongful Commercialisation and Commodification?
294(4)
5 Conclusion: Legitimating the Use of Biomaterials
298(2)
10 The Future of Human Biomaterials?
300(9)
1 Introduction
300(1)
2 Human Biomaterials and the Property (r)Evolution
301(3)
3 Questioning Boundaries and Philosophical Foundations
304(4)
4 A Final Word: Philosophic Deadwood?
308(1)
Bibliography 309(20)
Index 329
Muireann Quigley is Professor of Law, Medicine, and Technology at the University of Birmingham. Before moving to academia she was a medical doctor. Her research is explicitly interdisciplinary and focuses on the philosophical analysis of law and policy. She is particularly interested in biotechnological advances and innovations, and how these can and ought to be dealt with by society. She has previously held a number of research grants, including from the Wellcome Trust and the Leverhulme Trust. She is a member of the Editorial Board of Medical Law International. In 2012 she won the Mark S. Ehrenreich Prize in Healthcare Ethics Research.