Guthrie test samples: is the problem solved?

New Zealand bioethics journal Pub Date : 2004-06-01
Cordelia Thomas
{"title":"Guthrie test samples: is the problem solved?","authors":"Cordelia Thomas","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Most babies born in New Zealand have a blood sample taken shortly after birth for the purposes of certain screening tests. The samples are retained indefinitely. This paper considers whether such samples are the property of the child and whether the present changes in the Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Bill and the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers' Rights of 1996 are sufficient to resolve the issues. The paper expresses concern about the delegation of decision-making in this area to ethics committees.</p>","PeriodicalId":87199,"journal":{"name":"New Zealand bioethics journal","volume":"5 2","pages":"25-33"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Zealand bioethics journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Most babies born in New Zealand have a blood sample taken shortly after birth for the purposes of certain screening tests. The samples are retained indefinitely. This paper considers whether such samples are the property of the child and whether the present changes in the Health (National Cervical Screening Programme) Amendment Bill and the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers' Rights of 1996 are sufficient to resolve the issues. The paper expresses concern about the delegation of decision-making in this area to ethics committees.

格思里测试样品:问题解决了吗?
在新西兰出生的大多数婴儿都在出生后不久采集血液样本,以进行某些筛查测试。样品被无限期保留。本文考虑这些样本是否属于儿童的财产,以及目前《卫生(国家子宫颈检查方案)修正法案》和1996年《卫生和残疾服务消费者权利法典》的修改是否足以解决这些问题。本文对将这一领域的决策权委托给伦理委员会表示关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信