Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-12T19:40:23.275Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reviews in Medical Ethics: The Place of Altruism in a Raging Sea of Market Commerce

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Vanessa S. Perlman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
JLME Column
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , Spring 2005 , pp. 163 - 167
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2005

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

Youngner, S. J. Anderson, M. W. and Schapiro, R., eds., Transplanting Human Tissue: Ethics, Policy, and Practice (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004) at 14.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at xiii.Google Scholar
42 U.S.C. §§ 274 et seq. (1984).Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 106, 123.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 8.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 17.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 29. Only four states (Maryland, New York, Florida, and California) have tissue bank regulations.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 90.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 97.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 103.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 107 Charo discusses a Ninth Circuit case that arose in the context of presumed consent statutes, under which individuals are presumed to be organ donors unless they specify otherwise. The court held that if a state statute appears to provide that relatives have property rights in the body of the deceased, then the state may not remove tissues without giving notice to the families that they have the right to refuse donation. Newman v. Sathyavaglswaran, 287 F.3d 786 (9th Cir. 2002), cert, denied, 537 U.S. 1029 (2002).Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 133.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 136.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 140.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 150.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 154.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 143.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 143, 154.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 164.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 175.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 183.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 184.Google Scholar
Youngner, , supra note 1, at 186.Google Scholar
Tilney, N. L., Transplant: From Myth to Reality (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003).Google Scholar
Tilney, , supra note 25, at 245.Google Scholar
Tilney, , supra note 25, at 154.Google Scholar
Tilney, , supra note 25, at 245.Google Scholar
Tilney, , supra note 25, at 255.Google Scholar
Tilney, , supra note 25, at 274.Google Scholar
Younger, , supra note 1 at xii.Google Scholar
Tilney, , supra note 25, at 284.Google Scholar