 July 12 , 2006
| Topic: |
Moore v. Regents of University of California.
A case study of an unknowing patient used for research purposes and financial gain by his treating physician |
| Presenter: |
Amy McDaniel, San Diego State University |
| Location: |
SDSU Foundation: Sky Park |
| Discussion: |
When a treating physician doubles as a research scientist, risks of compromising both patient and human subject rights must be considered and addressed. Through the contemporary case history of Moore v. Regents of University of California, we will explore the ethical concerns when a patient seeking treatment is used for research purposes without his knowledge. |
Discussion
Questions:
|
- At what point should have Mr. Moore been informed of the research agenda and provided an opportunity to consent?
- Were Mr. Moore's rights as a patient compromised? As a research subject?
- What would be considered ethical justice for Mr. Moore?
|
| Readings: |
- Genetics and the Law, A project of the Council for Responsible Genetics
Case Detail
-
Bergman, Helen R. Case Comment: Moore v. Regents of the University of California. American Journal of Law & Medicine, 1992, Vol. 18 Issue 1/2, p127, 19p. For a PDF copy, please contact Amy McDaniel, amcdanie@mail.sdsu.edu.
- LSU Law Center, Fiduciary Duty of Researchers - the Spleen Case - Moore v. Regents of University of California, 793 P.2d 479 (Cal. 1990)
|
|
