Do we own our cells - Essay Example

Do you think the patient was treated fairly? The patient in this case did not receive a rational treatment given that practitioners based on their capacity and knowledge they have regarding ethics they ought to observe need to protect patient’s rights. This implies patients ought to have adequate information regarding research procedures, which certain practitioners are subjecting them. In case that they consent to take part, then they must be treated in a respectful way and everything must be kept confidential as identified in American Evaluation Association (Harris 234).

The patient should sign a consent form containing various details among them; description of the research, purpose, procedure description, feature risks, benefits and confidentiality. In addition, the practitioner while seeking the consent of the participant ought to have given further intentions behind the results (Leino-kilpi 11). These are economical benefits, which in reality were not for the patient but ended up using them and sought judicial intervention to contradict the entire case. This is not what it ought to be because the practitioner’s intention in this case was not to advance the field’s knowledge but more so to benefit economically without the knowledge of the patient.

In addition, confidentiality is a basic principle supposed to be between the practitioner and the patient (Leino-kilpi 13). This is because the patient usually expects no one would access or obtain his or her information but with consent it may be helpful in other fields through distribution. Therefore, in this case the practitioner took advantage of the patient’s ignorance and a statute that avails freedom one to use own knowledge in benefitting economically (Leino-kilpi 11).Do we own our cells after taking from our bodies?Yes.Defining cell donors’ ownership right has been major stumbling block in determining the right balance between patient right and medical research progress.

Every patient has right to privacy and information; hence any body part taken from them should not be done without their consent. If the cell is to be used for any scientific research or commercialization implications, the patient should at least get a share of the profit gained in such cases. In addition, the patient should avail well-versed consent as evident in Washington University v. catalona case (2006). In this case, I think body cells belong to the donor and practitioner cannot perform any act that infringes his or her right.

This implies suppose researchers in anyway infringes any of the stated laws ought to withdraw his or her cells from the intended research irrespective of what stage it may have reached.Is there anything else you would like to know about this case that might help you decide?Yes.In this case, I intend to know which factors the arbitrator considered before availing the final verdict because it is not an obvious thing for the patient being a claimant whose cells were used inappropriately end up loosing a suit.

In addition, I wish to know law’s stand regarding controversies that have emerged with the ownership of body parts once separated from the donor.Work CitedHarris, Muriel J. Evaluating Public and Community Health Programs. San Francisco, Califonia: Jossey-Bass, 2013. Internet resource.Leino-Kilpi, Helena. Patients Autonomy, Privacy and Informed Consent. Amsterdam: IOS Press, 2000. Print.