Journal of Law and Medicine最新文献

This article discusses ownership and property issues in three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting from the perspective of the tangible aspect of the technology. Many scholars have examined property issues in the intangible aspect of the technology, namely, the intellectual property issue. Since a major component of 3D bioprinting is cells taken from patients and donors, it is important to explore the right of ownership over the physical product, including cells used in the 3D bioprinting process and the 3D bioprinted organ itself. What is the extent of the donor's right over his/her cells taken for use in 3D bioprinting and even the 3D bioprinted organ - the product of those cells? For example, can the cell donor determine how his/her cells are used, or even who gets the 3D bioprinted organ? What rights does a person have over the commercial use of his/her cells or tissue for 3D bioprinting?

The rights of persons who seek medical attention have been enshrined in national and international legal instruments, notwithstanding their health status. However, these rights are not fully secured in Nigeria due to some factors affecting the health care system. Using the doctrinal method of study, this article examines the concept of the rights of patients in Nigeria. It discusses the nature of the health system in Nigeria and highlights the rights stated in the Patients' Bill of Rights 2018 (Ng) (PBoR) as well as the corresponding duties of health care practitioners. The article shows that the rights of patients in Nigeria highlighted in the PBoR, have been continuously hindered by their weak enforcement, inadequate funding, insufficient health care providers, inadequate infrastructure, lack of awareness and illiteracy. It concludes that urgent steps need to be taken by the Nigerian government as well as other relevant stakeholders in addressing these issues.

In Queensland, use of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and prenatal diagnostic testing (PND) is limited to the detection of and abstention from embryos or foetuses afflicted with "serious" disabilities. In the absence of a legislative definition or widespread consensus among physicians regarding those disablements which are sufficiently "serious", it begs the question: is Queensland's current regulation of PND and PGD inconsistent with the rule of law because it lacks clarity, stability, and certainty and thus arbitrarily restricts reproductive liberties? This article will demonstrate that the detection of genetic abnormalities via PGD and PND will lead to differing clinical outcomes pre- and post-implantation. While their utilisation for the therapeutic prevention of "serious" harm is a justifiable intrusion on reproductive autonomy, the medical professions' and disabled community's conceptualisations of disability are maligned. Queensland's adoption of a permissive licensing regime for PGD and the interactional model of disability by physicians administering PND is considered.

Deaths of participants in sport from the effects of concussive injuries and from chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) raise confronting social issues and challenges for tort law. An uncertainty that often needs to be addressed in such cases is proof of the causes of the former athlete's symptomatology, especially when they may be multifactorial, some or all of which were not directly related to sport. Accounts from the person prior to their death and from family members can be vital sources of such information. Coroners' analyses of evidence in concussion-related deaths constitute an important opportunity for perspectives which can form a sound empirical basis for changes to sporting practices, rules and administration. This editorial reviews a series of biographical and autobiographical accounts of sportspersons with concussion and CTE. It also identifies a corpus of coronial decisions from England, New Zealand, Canada and Australia which have addressed the risks posed to athletes from concussive injuries. It highlights recommendations made by coroners in relation to management of concussion in sport and argues that there is considerable scope for further valuable recommendations based upon their investigations during inquests.

Legislation supporting voluntary-assisted dying (VAD) is becoming more common globally, where it is used to promote an individual's autonomy in settings where they choose to alleviate their suffering by ending their life. This article examines and advocates for access to VAD in a new group - prisoners serving sentences of life imprisonment without parole. It addresses several morally important issues, and offers an ethical framework based on comparison to VAD in the setting of the terminally ill.

Technologically enhanced surveillance systems have been proposed for the task of monitoring and responding to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in both human, animal and environmental contexts. The use of these systems is in their infancy, although the advent of COVID-19 has progressed similar technologies in response to that pandemic. We conducted qualitative research to identify the Australian public's key concerns about the ethical, legal and social implications of an artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning-enhanced One Health AMR surveillance system. Our study provides preliminary evidence of public support for AI/machine learning-enhanced One Health monitoring systems for AMR, provided that three main conditions are met: personal health care data must be deidentified; data use and access must be tightly regulated under strong governance; and the system must generate high-quality, reliable analyses to guide trusted health care decision-makers.

This article explores the effect of Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc on the standard of care in United States medical malpractice proceedings. It posits that the significance of Daubert should not be viewed from the perspective of who should be permitted to testify as to the standard of care. Rather, the decision signals the need to reform what should be the content of that standard. Specifically, the Supreme Court, in overruling Frye v United States and imposing a "gatekeeper" role on trial judges, reasoned with the aim of producing more reliable expert evidence. This object would be best realised if doctors are required to testify in respect of whether the conduct in question was "reasonable", not whether it was in accordance with the thinking of other practitioners (as demanded by the current "deferential" standard of care).

The focus of this article is the notion that only grossly negligent conduct by a health care provider will constitute a novus actus interveniens and break the chain of causation between a tortious act and the ultimate harm suffered by a plaintiff. More precisely, it explores the question of what it means for a health care provider to be grossly negligent. Its purpose is not to devise an exhaustive list of acts or omissions likely to constitute grossly negligent medical treatment; it is not necessary or even prudent to do so. However, it is argued that more clearly defined parameters are needed to distinguish ordinary, actionable negligence from gross negligence in a clinical context.

The settlement of the National Football League (NFL) Players Concussion Litigation was founded on a unique set of circumstances: in essence that the NFL investigated the risk of Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy-like harm and then denied the risk. These circumstances are unlikely to be repeated in any of the thousands of lawsuits presently proposed by "non-NFL athletes" around the globe. These athletes face the far more difficult task of proving their overseeing sporting organisation had, or should have had, knowledge that repeated head trauma in playing contact sport can cause severe long-term cognitive harm, but to do so relying on "archived" reports dating back decades.

Gender diversity allows individuals to express their innate sense of self and has been increasingly recognised over time. Consequently, paediatric gender services have seen exponential increases in referrals internationally. This has resulted in novel issues for courts, such as a child's "best interests" when accessing puberty-suppressing and gender-affirming medical care. Most recently, in the United Kingdom, the adequacy of information provided to transgender children and their families was also debated. Progression of the common law in Australia has resulted in transgender children consenting to medical treatment once Gillick competent. Yet, Bell v Tavistock [2020] EWHC 3274 temporarily halted the care of the United Kingdom's transgender children, who were previously afforded consenting rights. On appeal it was determined to be inappropriate for the divisional court to have provided generalised guidance on children's capacity to consent to medical therapy. Through comparative analysis of case law, the adequacy of these regulations will be assessed.