David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Xenotransplantation - the transfer of living tissue between species - has long been heralded as a potential solution to the severe organ shortage crisis experienced by the United Kingdom and other 'developed' nations. However, the significant risks which accompany this biotechnology led the United Kingdom to adopt a cautious approach to its regulation, with the establishment of a non-departmental public body - UKXIRA - to oversee the development of this technology on a national basis. In December 2006 UKXIRA was quietly disbanded and replaced with revised guidance, which entrusts the regulation of xenotransplantation largely to research ethics committees. In this article we seek to problematize this new regulatory framework, arguing that specialist expertise and national oversight are necessary components of an adequate regulatory framework for a biotechnology which poses new orders of risk, challenges the adequacy of traditional understandings of autonomy and consent, and raises significant animal welfare concerns. We argue for a more considered and holistic approach, based on adequate consultation, to regulating biotechnological developments in the United Kingdom.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Marie Fox (2009). The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008: Tinkering at the Margins. [REVIEW] Feminist Legal Studies 17 (3):333-344.
Similar books and articles
Sheila A. M. McLean (2009). Clinical Ethics Consultation in the United Kingdom. Diametros 22:76 – 89.
Bärbel R. Dorbeck-Jung (2007). What Can Prudent Public Regulators Learn From the United Kingdom Government's Nanotechnological Regulatory Activities? NanoEthics 1 (3):257-270.
Jeffrey H. Barker & Lauren Polcrack (2001). Respect for Persons, Informed Consent Andthe Assessment of Infectious Disease Risks in Xenotransplantation. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 4 (1):53-70.
Robert Sparrow (2009). Xenotransplantation, Consent and International Justice. Developing World Bioethics 9 (3):119-127.
Edna F. Einsiedel & Heather Ross (2002). Animal Spare Parts? A Canadian Public Consultation on Xenotransplantation. Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (4):579-591.
J. Hughes (1998). Xenografting: Ethical Issues. Journal of Medical Ethics 24 (1):18-24.
Shawn H. E. Harmon (2008). Motivating Values and Regulatory Models for Emerging Technologies : Stem Cell Research Regulation in Argentina and the United Kingdom. In Michael D. A. Freeman (ed.), Law and Bioethics / Edited by Michael Freeman. Oxford University Press
Alistair Brown (2010). Therapeutic Cloning: The Ethical Road to Regulation. Part I: Arguments For and Against & Regulations. Human Reproduction and Genetic Ethics 15 (2):75-86.
David Hunter, Tis but a Scratch: The Human Tissue Act and the Use of Tissue for Research, Issues for Research Ethics Committees.
S. McLean & L. Williamson (2007). The Demise of UKXIRA and the Regulation of Solid-Organ Xenotransplantation in the UK. Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (7):373-375.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads14 ( #313,020 of 1,926,181 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #456,082 of 1,926,181 )
How can I increase my downloads?