The First Amendment Right to Speak About the Human Genome.

B. Evans
{"title":"The First Amendment Right to Speak About the Human Genome.","authors":"B. Evans","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2219522","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article explores whether laws that restrict the communication of genetic test results may, under certain circumstances, violate the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The focus is whether investigators have a right to return results from non-CLIA-certified laboratories in situations where a research participant requests the results and the investigator is willing to share them but is concerned that doing so may violate regulations under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (\"CLIA\"). This article takes no position on whether investigators can be compelled to return results when they do not wish to do so. It examines only whether investigators may, not whether they must, return results to a willing research participant. The article: (1) surveys state and federal laws that block communication of genetic test results to research participants; (2) examines the historical use of speech restrictions as a tool for protecting human research subjects; (3) traces how First Amendment doctrine has evolved since the 1970s when foundations of modern research bioethics were laid; (4) inquires whether recent bioethical and policy debate has accorded due weight to the First Amendment. The article applies two common methods of legal analysis, textual and constitutional analysis. It concludes that the CLIA regulations, when properly construed, do not treat the return of results as an event that triggers CLIA's certification requirements. Moreover, there is a potential First Amendment problem in construing CLIA's research exception in a way that bans the return of results from non-CLIA-certified laboratories.","PeriodicalId":90761,"journal":{"name":"University of Pennsylvania journal of constitutional law","volume":"16 3 1","pages":"549-636"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Pennsylvania journal of constitutional law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2219522","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

This article explores whether laws that restrict the communication of genetic test results may, under certain circumstances, violate the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The focus is whether investigators have a right to return results from non-CLIA-certified laboratories in situations where a research participant requests the results and the investigator is willing to share them but is concerned that doing so may violate regulations under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 ("CLIA"). This article takes no position on whether investigators can be compelled to return results when they do not wish to do so. It examines only whether investigators may, not whether they must, return results to a willing research participant. The article: (1) surveys state and federal laws that block communication of genetic test results to research participants; (2) examines the historical use of speech restrictions as a tool for protecting human research subjects; (3) traces how First Amendment doctrine has evolved since the 1970s when foundations of modern research bioethics were laid; (4) inquires whether recent bioethical and policy debate has accorded due weight to the First Amendment. The article applies two common methods of legal analysis, textual and constitutional analysis. It concludes that the CLIA regulations, when properly construed, do not treat the return of results as an event that triggers CLIA's certification requirements. Moreover, there is a potential First Amendment problem in construing CLIA's research exception in a way that bans the return of results from non-CLIA-certified laboratories.
第一修正案关于人类基因组的发言权。
本文探讨了在某些情况下,限制基因检测结果交流的法律是否违反了美国宪法第一修正案。焦点在于,如果研究参与者要求结果,研究者也愿意分享结果,但担心这样做可能违反1988年临床实验室改进修正案(“CLIA”)的规定,研究者是否有权返回非CLIA认证实验室的结果。本文对调查人员是否可以在他们不希望这样做的情况下被迫返回结果没有立场。它只检查调查人员是否可以,而不是他们是否必须,将结果返回给有意愿的研究参与者。文章:(1)调查了阻碍基因检测结果向研究参与者传达的州和联邦法律;(2)研究了历史上使用言论限制作为保护人类研究对象的工具;(3)追溯自20世纪70年代奠定现代研究生物伦理学基础以来,第一修正案原则是如何演变的;(4)询问最近的生物伦理和政策辩论是否给予了第一修正案应有的重视。本文运用了两种常用的法律分析方法:文本分析和宪法分析。它的结论是,当正确解释时,CLIA规定并未将结果返回视为触发CLIA认证要求的事件。此外,在解释CLIA的研究例外时,以禁止从非CLIA认证的实验室返回结果的方式,存在潜在的第一修正案问题。
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
CiteScore
0.60
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信