Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Genomics (2)
- Biobanks—Law and legislation (1)
- Bioethics (1)
- Biotechnology (1)
- Cognitive psychology (1)
-
- DNA (1)
- Damages (1)
- Disability (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Free will and determinism (1)
- Genetics (1)
- Inventions (1)
- Law & neuroscience (1)
- Legal norms (1)
- National Institutes of Health (U.S.) (1)
- Neuroimaging (1)
- Pain (1)
- Patents (1)
- Research ethics (1)
- Right of privacy (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- Tort liability (1)
- Torts (1)
- Whole genome sequencing (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Painful Disparities, Painful Realities, Amanda C. Pustilnik
Painful Disparities, Painful Realities, Amanda C. Pustilnik
Faculty Scholarship
Legal doctrines and decisional norms treat chronic claims pain differently than other kinds of disability or damages claims because of bias and confusion about whether chronic pain is real. This is law’s painful disparity. Now, breakthrough neuroimaging can make pain visible, shedding light on these mysterious ills. Neuroimaging shows these conditions are, as sufferers have known all along, painfully real. This Article is about where law ought to change because of innovations in structural and functional imaging of the brain in pain. It describes cutting-edge scientific developments and the impact they should make on evidence law and disability law, and, …
Finding Fault?: Exploring Legal Duties To Return Incidental Findings In Genomic Research, Elizabeth R. Pike, Karen H. Rothenberg, Benjamin E. Berkman
Finding Fault?: Exploring Legal Duties To Return Incidental Findings In Genomic Research, Elizabeth R. Pike, Karen H. Rothenberg, Benjamin E. Berkman
Faculty Scholarship
The use of whole genome sequencing in biomedical research is expected to produce dramatic advances in human health. The increasing use of this powerful, data-rich new technology in research, however, will inevitably give rise to incidental findings (IFs), findings with individual health or reproductive significance that are beyond the aims of the particular research, and the related questions of whether and to what extent researchers have an ethical obligation to return IFs. Many have concluded that researchers have an ethical obligation to return some findings in some circumstances, but have provided vague or context-dependent approaches to determining which IFs must …
Redefining Genomic Privacy: Trust And Empowerment, Yaniv Erlich, James B. Williams, David Glazer, Kenneth Yocum, Nita A. Farahany, Maynard Olson, Arvind Narayanan, Lincoln D. Stein, Jan A. Witkowski, Robert C. Kain
Redefining Genomic Privacy: Trust And Empowerment, Yaniv Erlich, James B. Williams, David Glazer, Kenneth Yocum, Nita A. Farahany, Maynard Olson, Arvind Narayanan, Lincoln D. Stein, Jan A. Witkowski, Robert C. Kain
Faculty Scholarship
Fulfilling the promise of the genetic revolution requires the analysis of large datasets containing information from thousands to millions of participants. However, sharing human genomic data requires protecting subjects from potential harm. Current models rely on de-identification techniques in which privacy versus data utility becomes a zero-sum game. Instead, we propose the use of trust-enabling techniques to create a solution in which researchers and participants both win. To do so we introduce three principles that facilitate trust in genetic research and outline one possible framework built upon those principles. Our hope is that such trust-centric frameworks provide a sustainable solution …
Diagnostic Patents At The Supreme Court, Arti K. Rai
Diagnostic Patents At The Supreme Court, Arti K. Rai
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Costs Of Changing Our Minds, Nita A. Farahany
The Costs Of Changing Our Minds, Nita A. Farahany
Faculty Scholarship
This isn’t quite a draft yet – it’s a concept paper. You’ll see after the first 10 pages a good bit of text in brackets, which are primarily notes for me, but it’ll give you a sense of the content of those sections. I’d like to talk through the concept – the “duty” to mitigate emotional distress damages and how courts have struggled with it, as a foray into a broader dichotomy that I see in a number of areas of law that suggest an implicit value in “cognitive liberty.” This is a smaller version of a broader book project …