Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T07:02:17.183Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Lessons from the Residual Newborn Screening Dried Blood Sample Litigation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Michelle Huckaby Lewis
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Most babies born each year in the U.S. undergo mandatory newborn screening to detect serious medical conditions that can cause devastating effects if treatment is not initiated prior to the onset of symptoms. Not all of the blood collected from newborns is used during routine newborn screening, and many states retain the residual dried blood samples (DBS). DBS have a broad range of potential uses, from program evaluation to public health and biomedical research unrelated to newborn screening. State laws vary regarding whether parental consent is required to use DBS for secondary research, but federal now requires parental consent for the use of DBS in federally funded research.

Type
JLME Supplement
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 43 , Issue S1 , Spring 2015 , pp. 32 - 35
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Academy of Pediatrics/Health Resources and Services Administration Newborn Screening Task Force, “Serving the Family from Birth to the Medical Home: Newborn Screening: A Blueprint for the Future: A Call for a National Agenda on State Newborn Screening Programs,” Pediatrics 106 no. 2, pt. 2 (1992): 389–422.Google Scholar
Mandl, K. D. Feit, S. Larson, C. Kohane, I. S., “Newborn Screening Program Practices in the United States: Notification, Research, and Consent,” Pediatrics 109, no. 2 (2002): 269–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olney, R. S. et al., “Storage and Use of Residual Dried Blood Spots from State Newborn Screening Programs,” Journal of Pediatrics 148, no. 5 (2007): 618–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, M. H. et al., “State Laws Regarding the Retention and Use of Residual Newborn Screening Blood Samples,” Pediatrics 127, no. 4 (2011): 703–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newborn Screening Saves Lives Reauthorization Act of 2014, Pub. L. 113–240 (2014).Google Scholar
Beleno v. Texas Dept. of State Health Services, U.S District Court, Western District of Texas, SA09CA0188, filed March 12, 3009.Google Scholar
Texas Department of State Health Services, Newborn Screening Settlement, Press Release, available at <www.dshs.state.tx.us/news/releases/20091222.shtm> (last visited January 16, 2015).+(last+visited+January+16,+2015).>Google Scholar
Ramshaw, E., “DSHS Turned Over Hundreds of DNA Samples to Feds,” Texas Tribune, available at <www.texastribune.org/stories/2010/feb/22/DSHS-turned-over-hundreds-of-DNA-samples-to-feds/> (last visited January 16, 2015).+(last+visited+January+16,+2015).>Google Scholar
Higgins v. Texas Department of Health Services, 801 F. Supp. 2d 541, 2011.Google Scholar
Texas Department of State Health Services website, available at <www.dshs.state.tx.us/lab/nbsbloodspots.shtm> (last visited January 16, 2015).+(last+visited+January+16,+2015).>Google Scholar
Minn. Stat. Section 13.386. (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bearder v. State, 806 N.W.2d 766 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 2011).Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Burns Ind. Code Ann. §16-41-17-10 (2013).Google Scholar
Indiana State Department of Health website, available at <www.in.gov/isdh/20215.htm> (last visited January 16, 2015).+(last+visited+January+16,+2015).>Google Scholar
Doe v. VanNess, Marion County Superior Court, 49D011409CT031, filed September 25, 2014.Google Scholar