Rutgers law review最新文献_第2页

Dead daddies: issues in postmortem reproduction. 死去的父亲:死后生殖的问题。

Rutgers law review Pub Date : 2000-01-01

L A Dwyer

引用次数: 0

The special case of property rights in umbilical cord blood for transplantation. 移植用脐带血产权特殊案例。

Rutgers law review Pub Date : 1999-01-01

S R Munzer

{"title":"The special case of property rights in umbilical cord blood for transplantation.","authors":"S R Munzer","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this Article, Professor Stephen R. Munzer makes a case for limited property rights in umbilical cord blood. Professor Munzer proposes that the unique nature of cord blood distinguishes it from body wastes and qualifies it as a body part in which property rights vest. Employing a theory of property, based in part on the articulation of the principles of utility and efficiency, justice and equality, and \"labor-desert,\" he explores legal and philosophical arguments that justify the acknowledgment of such rights. He also discusses concerns over alleged generous granting of patents in the area of cord blood stem cells in light of these principles. Significant aspects of health policy are explored with particular focus on the potential value of using cord blood to treat various diseases and disorders. Professor Munzer discusses various difficult cases involving the exercise of property rights in umbilical cord blood with respect to the interests and/or motives of newborns, parents, and other parties. He argues that some of the concerns associated with the commercialization and commodification of cord blood are not serious enough to warrant significant barriers to market exchanges of property rights in cord blood. In addition, he concludes that the particular nature and harvesting of cord blood do not make its commodification morally problematic. Finally, Professor Munzer reinforces his treatment of property rights in cord blood by addressing objections that view property as \"propriety,\" as a pragmatic institution, or as social relations.</p>","PeriodicalId":82623,"journal":{"name":"Rutgers law review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"22328053","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Constructing competence: formulating standards of legal competence to make medical decisions. 能力建构:制定医疗决策的法律能力标准。

Rutgers law review Pub Date : 1996-01-01

J W Berg, P S Appelbaum, T Grisso

引用次数: 0

A patient's decision to decline lifesaving medical treatment: bodily integrity versus the preservation of life. 病人决定拒绝挽救生命的医疗:身体的完整与生命的保存。

Rutgers law review Pub Date : 1973-01-01 DOI: 10.7312/weir91040-019

N. Cantor

引用次数: 27