Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Genetic Information and Research: Emerging Legal Issues

  • Published:
HEC Forum Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

REFERENCES

  1. Department of Health and Human Services, Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing. Enhancing the oversight of genetic tests: Recommendations of the secretary's advisory committee on genetic testing. [On-line]. Available: http://www4.od.nih.gov/oba/sacgt/reports/FINAL_SACGTreport713700correctedpage27.htm. 2000 (visited 2/11/03).

  2. Department of Health and Human Services, Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing. Federal Register 65(236). [On-line]. Available: http://www4.od.nih.gov/oba/sacgt/frnotices/GTFR120700.pdf. 2000 (visited 2/11/03).

  3. Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing. Highlights of the twelfth meeting of the secretary's advisory committee on genetic testing. [On-line]. Available: http://www4.od.nih.gov/oba/sacgt/highlights/highlights_feb_02.pdf. 2002 (visited 2/11/03).

  4. Human Genome Project Information. Evaluating gene tests: Some considerations. [On-line]. Available: http://www.ornl.gov/hgmis/resource/testeval.html. (visited 2/13/03).

  5. Casey, D. What can the new gene tests tell us? [On-line]. Available: http://www.ornl.gov/TechResources/Human_Genome/publicat/judges/judge.html. 1997. (visited 2/13/03).

  6. Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing. Highlights of the thirteenth meeting of the secretary's advisory committee on genetic testing.[On-line]. Available: http://www4.od.nih.gov/oba/sacgt/highlightsmay02.pdf. 2002 (visited 2/13/03).

  7. Vogel F and Motulsky AG. Human genetics, 3rd ed. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  8. 42 U.S.C. 263a; 42 CFR 493.

  9. 21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.

  10. National Human Genome Research Institute. Promoting safe and effective genetic testing in the United States: Final report of the task force on genetic testing. [On-line]. Available: http://www.nhgri.nih.gov/ELSI/TFGT_final/#EXECUTIVE. 1997 (visited 2/11/03).

  11. Department of Health and Human Services, Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing. Development of a classification methodology for genetic tests: Conclusions and recommendations of the secretary's advisory committee on genetic testing [On-line]. Available: http://www4.od.nih.gov/oba/sacgt/reports/Addendum_final.pdf. 2001 (visited 2/11/03).

  12. Conference summary, genetic testing and public policy: Preparing health professionals. [On-line]. Available: http://www4.od.nih.gov/oba/sacgt/highlights5–13–02.pdf. 2002 (visited 2/11/03).

  13. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, Establishment of the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetics, Health, and Society. Federal Register 67(205). [On-line]. Available: http://www4.od.nih.gov/oba/sacghs/SACGHSFRNoticeoct2302.pdf. 2002. (visited 2/11/03).

  14. Clinical Laboratory Improvement Advisory Committee (CLIAC). Meeting summary. [On-line]. Available: http://www.phppo.cdc.gov/cliac/cliac0201.asp. 2001 (visited 2/11/03).

  15. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Laboratory Systems. Genetic testing-policy. [On-line]. Available: http://www.phppo.cdc.gov/dls/genetics/noi.asp. (visited 2/11/03).

  16. Nelkin D. Behavioral genetics and dismantling the welfare state. In: Carson RA, Rothstein MA; eds. Behavioral genetics: The clash of culture and biology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1999: 156–171.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Rothstein LF. Genetic information in schools. In: Rothstein MA; ed. Genetic secrets: Protecting privacy and confidentiality in the genetic era. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Green RM and Thomas AM. DNA: Five distinguishing features for policy analysis. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology. 1998; 11: 575–576.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kevles DJ. In the name of eugenics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  20. House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. The potential for discrimination in health insurance based on predictive genetic tests, testimony of Karen H. Rothenberg, July 11, 2001. [On-line]. Available: http://energycommerce.house.gov/107/hearings/07112001Hearing322/Rothenberg521.htm. 2001 (visited 12/21/02).

  21. Wolf SM. Beyond ‘genetic discrimination': Toward the broader harm of geneticism. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. 1995; 23.

  22. Daniels N. The genome project, individual differences, and just health care. In: Murphy TF and Lappé MA; eds., Justice and the human genome project. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Berry RM. The genetic revolution and the physician's duty of confidentiality: The role of the old Hippocratic virtues in the regulation of the new genetic intimacy. Journal of Legal Medicine. 1997; 18(4).

  24. Berry RM. The human genome project and the end of insurance. University of Florida Journal of Law and Public Policy. 1996; 7.

  25. Cantor C. The challenges to technology and informatics. In: Kevles DJ and Hood L; eds. The code of codes: Scientific and social issues in the human genome project. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Keller EF. Nature, nurture, and the human genome project. In: Kevles DJ and Hood L; eds. The code of codes: Scientific and social issues in the human genome project. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  27. House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. The potential for discrimination in health insurance based on predictive genetic tests, July 11, 2001. [On-line]. Available: http://energycommerce.house.gov/107/hearings/07112001Hearing322/hearing.htm. 2000 (visited 2/13/03).

  28. Hudson KL, Rothenberg KH, Andrews LB, Kahn MJE, and Collins FS. Genetic discrimination and health insurance: An urgent need for reform. Science. 1995; 270.

  29. National Human Genome Research Institute, Department of Health and Human Services. Health insurance in the age of genetics. [On-line]. Available: http://www.nhgri.nih.gov/NEWS/Insurance/index.html. 1997 (visited 2/13/03).

  30. House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection. The potential for discrimination in health insurance based on predictive genetic tests, testimony of Dr. Donald A. Young, July 11, 2001. [On-line]. Available: http://energycommerce.house.gov/107/hearings/07112001Hearing322/Young519.htm. 2001 (visited 2/13/03).

  31. Pokorski RJ. Use of genetic information by private insurers. In: Murphy TF and Lappé MA; eds. Justice and the human genome project. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  32. National Conference of State Legislatures, Genetic Technologies Project. State genetics laws. [On-line]. Available: http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/genetics/charts.htm. 2003 (visited 2/13/03).

  33. National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) [On-line]. Available: http://www.nhgri.nih.gov/Policy_and_public_affairs/Legislation/insure.htm. 2002 (visited 2/13/03).

  34. National Conference of State Legislatures, Genetic Technologies Project. Genetics legislative activity. [On-line]. Available: http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/genetics/charts.htm. 2003 (visited 2/13/03).

  35. Epstein RA. The legal regulation of genetic discrimination: Old responses to new technology. Boston University Law Review. 1994; 74.

  36. NIH-DOE Working Group on Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications of Human Genome Research. Genetic information and health insurance: Report of the task force on genetic information and insurance. 1993, NIH Pub. No. 93–3686.

  37. Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services. Public Law 104–191. (August 21, 1996). [On-line]. Available: http://cms.Hhs.gov/hipaa/. 1996 (visited 2/13/03).

  38. 29 U.S.C. Section 1001 et seq.

  39. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e, et seq.

  40. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), 42 U.S.C. Section 12101, et seq.

  41. House Committee on Education and the Workforce, Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations. Hearing on genetic nondiscrimination: Implications for employers and employees. Testimony of Cheye Calvo, July 24, 2001. [On-line]. Available: http://www.house.gov/ed_workforce/hearings/107th/eer/genetic72401/calvo.htm. 2001 (visited 2/13/03).

  42. U.S. Department of Labor, Department of Health and Human Services, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and Department of Justice. Genetic information and the workplace. [On-line]. Available: http://www.nhgri.nih.gov:80/HGP/Reports/genetics_workplace.html. 1998 (visited 2/13/03).

  43. House Committee on Education and the Workforce, Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations. Hearing on genetic nondiscrimination: Implications for employers and employees, July 24, 2001. [On-line]. Available: http://www.house.gov/ed_workforce/hearings/107th/eer/genetic72401/w172401.htm. 2001 (visited 2/13/03).

  44. Nelkin D and Tancredi L. Dangerous diagnostics: The social power of biological information. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Draper E. Risky business: Genetic testing and exclusionary practices in the hazardous workplace. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  46. House Committee on Education and the Workforce, Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations. Hearing on genetic nondiscrimination: Implications for employers and employees. Testimony of Eric Rolfe Greenberg, July 24, 2001. [On-line]. Available: http://www.house.gov/ed_workforce/hearings/107th/eer/genetic72401/greenberg.htm. 2001 (visited 2/13/03).

  47. House Committee on Education and the Workforce, Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations. Hearing on genetic nondiscrimination: Implications for employers and employees. Testimony of Cheye Calvo, July 24, 2001. [On-line]. Available: http://www.house.gov/ed_workforce/hearings/107th/eer/genetic72401/calvo.htm. 2001 (visited 2/13/03).

  48. House Committee on Education and the Workforce, Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations. Hearing on genetic nondiscrimination: Implications for employers and employees. Testimony of Harold P. Coxson, July 24, 2001. [On-line]. Available: http://www.house.gov/ed_workforce/hearings/107th/eer/genetic72401/coxson.htm. 2001 (visited 2/13/03).

  49. Rothstein MA. Genetics and the work force of the next hundred years. Columbia Business Law Review, 2000.

  50. 2 EEOC Compliance Manual, 902–45 (March 14, 1995).

  51. Senate Bill 318, introduced February 13, 2001, by Senators Daschle, Christopher J. Dodd, Tom Harkin, and Edward M. Kennedy, and companion House of Representatives Bill 602, by Representative Louise M. Slaughter.

  52. Executive Order No. 13,145, 65 Federal Register (2000), 6,877.

  53. Rothstein MA and Hoffman S. Genetic testing, genetic medicine, and managed care. Wake Forest Law Review. 1999; 34(849).

  54. Parker CM. Camping trips and family trees: Must Tennessee physicians warn their patients' relatives of genetic risks? Tennessee Law Review. 1998; 65(585).

  55. Berry RM. The genetic revolution and the physician's duty of confidentiality: The role of the old hippocratic virtues in the regulation of the new genetic intimacy. Journal of Legal Medicine. 1997; 18(4).

  56. Laurie GT. Challenging medical-legal norms: The role of autonomy, confidentiality, and privacy in protecting individual and familial group rights in genetic information. Journal of Legal Medicine. 2001; 22(1).

  57. 35 U.S.C. Section 154. See also U.S.C. Sections 111, 120, 121, 365(c).

  58. Doll JJ. The patenting of DNA. Science. May 1, 1998; 280.

  59. Heller MA and Eisenberg RS. Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science. May 1, 1998; 280. [On-line]. Available: http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/980465.shl. (visited 2/13/03).

  60. Meyers AS. Intellectual property at the public-private divide: A response. University of Chicago Law School Roundtable. 1996; 3.

  61. Eisenberg RS. Intellectual property at the public-private divide: The case of large-scale cDNA sequencing. University of Chicago Law School Roundtable. 1996; 3.

  62. Epstein RA. Property rights in cDNA sequences: A new resident for the public domain. University of Chicago Law School Roundtable. 1996; 3.

  63. 35 U.S.C. Section 103.

  64. Steinberg D. Will genomics spoil gene ownership? The Scientist. 2000; 14(17).

  65. 35 U.S.C. 200–212 (1994).

  66. Rai AK. Regulating scientific research: Intellectual property rights and the norms of science. Northwestern University Law Review. 1999; 94.

  67. Eisenberg RS. Public research and private development: Patents and technology transfer in government-sponsored research. Virginia Law Review. 1996; 82.

  68. Rifkin J. The biotech century. New York: Jeremy P. Tarcher/Putnam; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Goldberg S. Gene patents and the death of dualism. Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal. 1996; 5.

  70. Cook-Deegan R. The gene wars: Science, politics, and the human genome. New York: W.W. Norton; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Kevles DJ and Hood L. eds. The code of codes: Scientific and social issues in the human genome project. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Kevles DJ. Out of eugenics: The historical politics of the human genome. In: Kevles DJ and Hood L; eds. The code of codes: Scientific and social issues in the human genome project. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  73. National Institutes of Health. Report and recommendations of the panel to assess the NIH investment in research on gene therapy, Stuart H. Orkin, M.D. and Arno G. Motulsky, M.D., Co-chairs, December 7, 1995. [On-line]. Available: http://www.nih.gov/news/panelrep.html. 1995 (visited 2/13/03).

  74. Wade, N. Gene experiment comes close to crossing ethicists' line. [On-line]. Available: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/23/science/23GENE.html. 2001 (visited 2/13/03).

  75. Seppa N. 'Bubble’ babies thrive on gene therapy. Science News. April 29, 2000; 157(18).

  76. Seppa N. Genetically altered cells ease hemophilia. Science News. June 9, 2001; 159(23).

  77. National Institutes of Health, Advisory Committee to the Director, Working Group on NIH Oversight of Clinical Gene Transfer Research. Enhancing the protection of human subjects in gene transfer research at the National Institutes of Health, July 12, 2000. [On-line]. Available: http://www.nih.gov/about/director/07122000.htm#exec. 2000 (visited 2/13/03).

  78. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Office of Biotechnology Activities, National Institutes of Health. Serious adverse event in a study of gene transfer in x-linked severe combined immunodeficiency. Fact sheet, January 14, 2003. [On-line]. Available: http://www4.od.nih.gov/OBA/RAC/Fact_Sheet.pdf. 2003 (visited 2/13/03).

  79. Jenks S. Gene therapy death—'Everyone has to share in the guilt'. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2000; 92.

  80. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. Sitemap. [On-line]. Available: http://www.fda.gov/cber/sitemap.htm. 2003 (visited 2/13/03).

  81. Beach JE. The new RAC: restructuring of the National Institutes of Health recombinant DNA advisory committee. Food and Drug Law Journal. 1999; 54.

  82. Pezzella M. In wake of patient death, U Penn gene therapy program closes. Biotechnology Newswatch. June 5, 2000.

  83. Stolberg SG. Institute restricted after gene therapy death. New York Times. May 25, 2000.

  84. Benowitz S. Lines disintegrating between industry, academic research. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2000; 92.

  85. Finn R. Reports bring several changes to IRBs. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2000; 92.

  86. Stolberg SG. Despite ferment, gene therapy progresses. New York Times. June 6, 2000.

  87. Shalala D. Protecting research subjects—What must be done. New England Journal of Medicine. 2000; 343: 808–810.

    Google Scholar 

  88. American Society of Gene Therapy. Policy on financial conflict of interest in clinical research, April 5, 2000. [On-line]. Available: http://www.asgt.org/policy/index.html. 2000 (visited 2/13/03).

  89. American Society of Gene Therapy. Official response to the notice of actions under the NIH guidelines, December 18, 2001 [On-line]. Available: http://www.asgt.org/regulatory_issues/nih_recombinant dna_response.html. 2001 (visited 2/13/03).

  90. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, Office of Biotechnology Activities. Recombinant DNA research: Actions under the NIH guidelines Federal Register, 66(223). [On-line]. Available: http://www4.od.nih.gov/oba/rac/frnotices/11–19–01act.htm. 2001 (visited 2/12/03).

  91. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, Office of Biotechnology Activities. Recombinant DNA research: Notice under the NIH guidelines. Federal Register, 67(101). [On-line]. Available: http://www4.od.nih.gov/oba/rac/frnotices/5–24–02.htm. 2002 (visited2/12/03).

  92. National Institutes of Health. NIH guidelines: Guidelines for research involving recombinant DNA molecules [On-line]. Available: http://www4.od.nih.gov/oba/rac/guidelines/guidelines.html. 2002 (visited 2/12/03).

  93. Walters L and Palmer JC. The ethics of human gene therapy. New York: Oxford University Press; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Annas GJ. The man on the moon, immortality, and other millennial myths: The prospects and perils of human genetic engineering. Emory Law Journal. 2000; 49.

  95. Berry RM. Eugenics after the Holocaust: The limits of reproductive rights. In: Signer MA; ed. Humanity at the limit: The impact of the Holocaust experience on Jews and Christians. Bloomington: Indiana University Press; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Berry RM. Genetic enhancement in the twenty-first century: Three problems in legal imagining. Wake Forest Law Review. 1999; 34.

  97. Berry RM. From involuntary sterilization to genetic enhancement: The unsettled legacy of Buck v. Bell. Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy. 1998; 12.

  98. Buchanan A, Brock DW, Daniels N, and Winkler D. From chance to choice: Genetics and justice. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Stock G and Campbell J; eds. Engineering the human germline: An exploration of the science and ethics of altering the genes we pass to our children. New York: Oxford University Press; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  100. Parens E; ed. Enhancing human traits: Ethical and social implications. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press; 1998.

  101. Harris J. Clones, genes, and immortality: Ethics and the genetic revolution. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  102. Kass LR. Triumph or tragedy? The moral meaning of genetic technology. American Journal of Jurisprudence. 2000; 45.

  103. McGee G. The perfect baby: Parenthood in the new world of cloning and genetics, 2nd ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  104. Mehlman MJ. The law of averages: Leveling the new genetic enhancement playing field. Iowa Law Review. 2000; 85.

  105. Robertson JA. Genetic selection of offspring characteristics. Boston University Law Review, 1996; 76.

  106. Silver LM. Remaking Eden: How genetic engineering and cloning will transform the American family. New York: Avon Books; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  107. National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Cloning human beings: Report and recommendations of the national bioethics advisory commission (June 1997).

  108. Seelye KQ. Clinton bans federal money for efforts to clone humans. New York Times. March 5, 1997.

  109. Dolgin JL. Cloning debate. Hofstra Law Review. 1999; 27.

  110. House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Health. Legislative hearing on H.R. 1644, Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001, and H.R. 2172, Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001,” Testimony of Claude Allen, June 20, 2001. [On-line]. Available: http://energy commerce.house.gov/107/hearings/06202001Hearing291/Allen449.htm. 2001 (visited 2/13/03).

  111. National Conference of State Legislatures, Genetic Technologies Project. State genetics laws: Human cloning [On-line]. Available: http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/genetics/charts.htm. 2003 (visited 2/13/03).

  112. AAAS Center for Science, Technology, & Congress. Policy brief: Human cloning, January 2003 (updated). [On-line]. Available: http://www.aaas.org/spp/cstc/issues/cloning.htm. 2003 (visited 2/13/03).

  113. House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Crime. The ethics of cloning, June 7, 2001. [On-line]. Available: http://www.house.gov/judiciary/3.htm. 2001 (visited 2/13/03).

  114. House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Crime. Human cloning, June 19, 2001. [On-line]. Available: http://www.house.gov/judiciary/3.htm. 2001 (visited 2/13/03).

  115. Andrews LB. The clone age: Adventures in the new world of reproductive technology. New York: Henry Holt; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  116. Davis DS. Genetic dilemmas: Reproductive technology, parental choices, and children's futures. New York: Routledge; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  117. Harris J. Clones, genes, and immortality: Ethics and the genetic revolution. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  118. Kass LR and Wilson JQ. The ethics of human cloning. Washington, D.C.: AEI Press; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  119. Kolata G. Clone: The road to Dolly and the path ahead. New York: William Morrow; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  120. Pence GE. Who's afraid of human cloning? New York: Rowman & Littlefield; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  121. Robertson JA. Human Cloning and the Challenge of Regulation. New England Journal of Medicine. July 9, 1998; 339: 119–22.

Download references

Authors
  1. Roberta M. Berry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Berry, R.M. Genetic Information and Research: Emerging Legal Issues. HEC Forum 15, 70–99 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023296026711

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023296026711

Keywords

Search

Navigation