Journal of Law and the Biosciences最新文献

The sharing of health data is an essential component in the provision of healthcare, in medical research, and disease surveillance. Health data sharing is subject to regulatory frameworks that vary across jurisdictions. In Africa, numerous factors complicate the regulation of health data sharing, including technological, motivational, economic, and political barriers, as well as ethical and legal challenges. This comparative study examines the regulation of health data sharing in Africa by comparing and contrasting the legal and policy frameworks of five African countries. The study identifies gaps and inconsistencies in the current regulatory regimes and provides recommendations for improving the regulation of health data sharing in Africa.

Epigenetic research has brought several important technological achievements, including identifying epigenetic clocks and signatures, and developing epigenetic editing. The potential military applications of such technologies we discuss are stratifying soldiers' health, exposure to trauma using epigenetic testing, information about biological clocks, confirming child soldiers' minor status using epigenetic clocks, and inducing epigenetic modifications in soldiers. These uses could become a reality. This article presents a comprehensive literature review, and analysis by interdisciplinary experts of the scientific, legal, ethical, and societal issues surrounding epigenetics and the military. Notwithstanding the potential benefit from these applications, our findings indicate that the current lack of scientific validation for epigenetic technologies suggests a careful scientific review and the establishment of a robust governance framework before consideration for use in the military. In this article, we highlight general concerns about the application of epigenetic technologies in the military context, especially discrimination and data privacy issues if soldiers are used as research subjects. We also highlight the potential of epigenetic clocks to support child soldiers' rights and ethical questions about using epigenetic engineering for soldiers' enhancement and conclude with considerations for an ethical framework for epigenetic applications in the military, defense, and security contexts.

Cryonics, the 'freezing' of the human body after death in the hope of reanimation in the future, remains a remote possibility, and yet it is becoming a more popular choice. There has been much academic discussion of the ethics of cryopreservation; however, the legal problems have received little attention. There are, however, several potential current conflicts that might arise, as was illustrated by the case of JS in England, in which a 14-year-old girl who sought cryopreservation against her father's wishes. In the USA, there have been disputes within families about cryonic preservation, and between cryonics organizations and loved ones of the deceased when there is negligent preservation. Cryopreservation raises questions concerning the law on death and posthumous interests, property in the body, contract law, and (potentially) negligence. We argue that, in the absence of proper regulation, cryonics organizations may be able to exploit the dying and dead. The potential legal problems that we have identified in relation to the law in England and Wales demonstrate that the law is ill-equipped to protect the interests of the dead and their next of kin.

A growing body of literature examines the ethico-legal challenges resulting from novel forms of assisted gestation like uterus transplantation and artificial placentas (also known as 'artificial wombs'). However, there has not yet been consideration of reproductive rights organizations/advocates' understandings of novel forms of assisted gestation and their challenges. These perspectives provide critical insight into how novel procreative practices are understood and the problems and pressures that might arise from their use. This is the first legal article to engage with reproductive rights organizations/advocates and thus it provides important contextual grounding to existing scholarship about assisted gestation. Focus group discussion epitomized the need for legal reform in key areas surrounding reproduction. Themes were constructed that exemplify what participants highlighted as critical: the need to re-evaluate the fundamentals of legal parenthood, consideration of how novel technologies could further enable the policing of gestation, and the space and time needed for law-making.

Innovations in neurotechnologies have ignited conversations about ethics around the world, with implications for researchers, policymakers, and the private sector. The human rights impacts of neurotechnologies have drawn the attention of United Nations bodies; nearly 40 states are tasked with implementing the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development's principles for responsible innovation in neurotechnology; and the United States is considering placing export controls on brain-computer interfaces. Against this backdrop, we offer the first review and analysis of neuroethics guidance documents recently issued by prominent government, private, and academic groups, focusing on commonalities and divergences in articulated goals; envisioned roles and responsibilities of different stakeholder groups; and the suggested role of the public. Drawing on lessons from the governance of other emerging technologies, we suggest implementation and evaluation strategies to guide practitioners and policymakers in operationalizing these ethical norms in research, business, and policy settings.

Artificial intelligence (AI) enables a medical device to optimize its performance through machine learning (ML), including the ability to learn from past experiences. In healthcare, ML is currently applied within controlled settings in devices to diagnose conditions like diabetic retinopathy without clinician input, for instance. In order to allow AI-based medical devices (AIMDs) to adapt actively to its data environment through ML, the current risk-based regulatory approaches are inadequate in facilitating this technological progression. Recent and innovative regulatory changes introduced to regulate AIMDs as a software, or 'software as a medical device' (SaMD), and the adoption of a total device/product-specific lifecycle approach (rather than one that is point-in-time) reflect a shift away from the strictly risk-based approach to one that is more collaborative and participatory in nature, and anticipatory in character. These features are better explained by a rights-based approach and consistent with the human right to science (HRS). With reference to the recent explication of the normative content of HRS by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of the United Nations, this paper explains why a rights-based approach that is centred on HRS could be a more effective response to the regulatory challenges posed by AIMDs. The paper also considers how such a rights-based approach could be implemented in the form of a regulatory network that draws on a 'common fund of knowledges' to formulate anticipatory responses to adaptive AIMDs. In essence, the HRS provides both the mandate and the obligation for states to ensure that regulatory governance of high connectivity AIMDs become increasingly collaborative and participatory in approach and pluralistic in substance.

In both the EU and USA, genetic data are recognized as a special category of data that requires heightened privacy protection. Identifiability and sensitivity are central pillars of the regulatory framework in both jurisdictions: the privacy concerns stem from the assumption that genetic data are capable of identifying the individual and reveals sensitive information about them. But not all genetic data are identifiable and sensitive, nor are genetic data necessarily different from other types of big data in terms of these issues. This article argues that a more nuanced approach is needed to assess the threat to privacy interests posed by uses of genetic data. The privacy interests involved should be distinguished in terms of proposed use, the amount of data in question, and its uniqueness and informational content. When these factors are disaggregated, it is clear that both regulatory schemes could better achieve their goals by focusing more on the ways genetic data can be used rather than on their status as a special category of data.

The open science (OS) movement has garnered increasing support in academia alongside continued financial and reputational incentives to obtain intellectual property (IP) protections over research outputs. Here, we explore stakeholder perspectives about intersections between OS and IP to inform the development of institutional OS guidelines for the neurosciences in Canada. We held six focus groups and three interviews with 29 faculty members from a major research and clinical center in Canada. The semi-structured interview guide probed perspectives on the respective roles of patents and OS in neuroscience-related research. We applied thematic content analysis to the transcript data, and extracted 12 major themes and 30 subthemes. Participants perceived a conflict between OS ideologies and the inherently restrictive nature of patents, and highlighted the importance of autonomy, justice, and respectful, culturally safe research practices in any future adoption of OS. Overall, the data suggest that a hybrid OS-IP policy model supported by local expertise may be best suited to meet the priorities and values of the community while mitigating perceived threats. This model includes expanded education about patenting, incentivized data sharing and collaboration, and tangible resources to support implementation of OS that includes skilled support in digital research infrastructures.