Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T07:51:20.007Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Weiss v. Solomon: A Case Study in Institutional Responsibility for Clinical Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 April 2021

Benjamin Freedman  and
Kathleen Cranley Glass
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
Case and Comment
Information
Law, Medicine and Healthcare , Volume 18 , Issue 4 , Winter 1990 , pp. 395 - 403
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics

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

[1989] R.J.Q. 731.Google Scholar
Canadian Health Facilities Law Guide p. 4133, May, 1989.Google Scholar
Examination on Discovery Out of Court After Plea. Deposition of Dr. Martin Kaback. Case No. 500-05-016-729-822, Superior Court, Montreal, Weiss v. Solomon.Google Scholar
Karhunen, U., Raitta, C., Kala, R., “Adverse Reactions to Fluorescein Angiography,” Acta Ophthalmologica 1986; 64: 282–6.Google Scholar
Letter from P.V. Latour, M.D., to Lazar Sarna, March 21, 1983, based upon Weiss' medical records.Google Scholar
Fleming, J.C., The Law of Torts (7th ed.) 1987.Google Scholar
Quebec, Charter of Rights and Freedoms, R.S.Q., c.C-12, a.1, Articles 19 and 20, C.C.L.C. (Civil Code of Lower Canada).Google Scholar
[1980] 2 S.C.R. 880.Google Scholar
[1980] 2 S.C.R. 192.Google Scholar
These terms, with all their inherent ambiguities, are employed by the Supreme Court of Canada to define the required standard of disclosure; cf. Hopp v. Lepp, op. cit. no. 9.Google Scholar
Ibid., p. 209.; Reibl v. Hughes, op. cit. no. 8, pp. 884–5.Google Scholar
Deschamps, P., Glass, K.C., Knoppers, B.M., Morneault, B., Health Care Liability in Canada, Quebec Research Center of Private and Comparative Law (1989).Google Scholar
114 Wis 1, 89 N.W. 924 (1902).Google Scholar
214 Cal 679, 8 P.(2d) 109 (1932).Google Scholar
272 Mich 273, 261 N.W. 762 (1935).Google Scholar
C.S. 751717 (Montreal) Dec. 4, 1973 (unreported).Google Scholar
321 S.E. (2d) 240 (1984).Google Scholar
(1987) 17 B.C.L.R (2d) 363 (B.C. Supreme Court); Vancouver Registry CA008375; 1989 B.C. No. 2365 (B.C. Court of Appeal).Google Scholar
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, The Belmont Report: Ethical Principals and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects and Research (1978); Medical Research Council of Canada, Ethics in Human Experimentation, Report No. 6 (1978).Google Scholar
(1965) 53 D.L.R. (2d) 436).Google Scholar
R.R.Q., 1981 C. M-9, r.4, art.2.03.28 and 2.03.29.Google Scholar
Baudouin, J-L., “L'expérimentation sur les humains: Un conflit de valeurs”, (1980–81) 26 McGill L. J. 809–846; Baudouin, J-L., La responsabilité civile délictuelle, Biais, Y., Cowansville, 1985; Mayrand, A., L'inviolabilité de la personne humaine. Wilson & Lafleur, Montréal, 1975; Somerville, M.A., “Structuring the Issues in Informed Consent”, (1980–81) 26 McGill L. J. 740–808; Waddams, S.T., “Medical Experiments on Human Subjects”, (1968) 25 U.T. Faculty L.R. 25–54.Google Scholar
World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Recommendations Guiding Medical Doctors in Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects; adopted by the 18th World Medical Assembly, Helsinki, Finland, 1964; revised by the 29th World Medical Assembly, Tokyo, Japan, 1975.Google Scholar
Examination on Discovery After Plea, Deposition of Dr. Norman Kalant, Feb. 13, 1988, Case No. 500-05-016729-822, Weiss v. Solomon.Google Scholar
Letter of M. McGregor, M.D. to Me L. Sarna, December 29, 1987.Google Scholar
Il en est de même du défendeur, l'hôpital, qui, par son comité recherche, a approuvé le protocole de recherche ainsi que la formule de consentement à être obtenu de chacun des participants au programme de recherche. Le “Research Committee” de l'hôpital ne peut ignorer ce que ses participants et membres connaissent. Même si la formule de consentement à être obtenue des participants au programme de recherche n'est pas réglementée par quelque disposition que ce soit, il y a lieu de se demander pourquoi la description du risque de l'angiogramme à la fluorescèine est minimisée dans la formule de consentement, alors qu'elle aurait dû être explicitée par le médecin chargé de l'application du protocole de recherche?Google Scholar
Rég. en vertu de la Loi sur les services de santé et les services sociaux, A.C. 3322 72 du 08.11.72, (1972) 104G.o.qq, 10566; superceded by Loi sur les services de santé et les services sociaux, L.R.Q. 1977, c.S-5, as amended, art. 125 and Rég. sur l'organisation et administration des établissements, Décret 1320–84 du 06.06.84 (1984) 116 G.O. 28, 2745 art. 6.9, as amended.Google Scholar
Freedman, B., “The Validity of Ignorant Consent to Medical Research,” I.R.B. 4:2 (1982).Google Scholar
From the risks of a given project to the history of the Roman Empire to the location of the Kahnawake reserve to the birds and bees.Google Scholar
(1983) 22 C.C.L.T. 254.Google Scholar
Guidelines, (1978).Google Scholar
Barber, B., Lally, J., Makarushka, J., Sullivan, D., Research on Human Subjects: Problems of Social Control in Medical Experimentation (1973).Google Scholar
Gray, B., Cooke, R. and Tannenbaum, A., “Research Involving Human Subjects,” Science 201:1094–1101 (1978).Google Scholar
DuVal, B., “The Human Subjects Protection Committee: An Experiment in Decentralized Federal Regulation,” American Bar Found. Research J. 3:571 (1979).Google Scholar
Reibl v. Hughes, op. cit. no. 8, 894.Google Scholar