Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-7drxs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T14:14:57.791Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - Property in human material

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2014

David Price
David Price
Affiliation:
De Montfort University, Leicester
Get access

Summary

There is a widespread adverse reaction to the notion of property rights in the human body. These are both intrinsic and instrumental reservations, in that they stem from essentialist views regarding the nature of the person and the proper respect and dignity owed, and consequentialist concerns relating to the effects of objectification of the body. The latter are conceptual and pragmatic. In particular, potential commercial trading in body parts is commonly viewed as an inextricable aspect of recognising property in human biological materials, drawing criticisms of commodification and concerns that such rights located in the tissue source would impede or undermine vital activities in the public interest. But not only are such objections able to be countered, the very unique nature of property-based interests is a persuasive factor in favour of a framework of property rights in this context. Indeed, it may be that property rights in donors paradoxically serve to constrain commercial practices and the unauthorised use of such materials by third parties.

Whilst the law’s attitude to property rights in human body parts is at best ambiguous, it should not be supposed that property rights are anathema under existing schema. In fact, paradoxically, property rights have been juridically invoked specifically in order to protect the legitimate interests of possessors and users of biological materials, whether this be as part of the process of forensic investigation, anatomical or post-mortem examination, retention of tissue samples for research, etc. Not only are such rights fairly pervasive as regards third-party users of tissue, they are crucial in order to further such activities, although their ambit is currently piecemeal and unreliable; failing to provide sufficient confidence for storers and users. As Magnusson states ‘Unless some form of proprietary rights are recognised in cadaveric specimens, museums and medical school specimens could be damaged, stolen, or in fact retained with impunity’. Indeed, almost everyone would endorse property rights of some hue or other in this context.

Type
Chapter
Information
Human Tissue in Transplantation and Research
A Model Legal and Ethical Donation Framework
 , pp. 230 - 281
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2009

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

Nwabueze, R., ‘Biotechnology and the new property regime in human bodies and body parts’ (2002) 24 Loyola University of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review 19 at 45Google ScholarPubMed
Dickens, B., ‘Living tissue and organ donors and property law: More on Moore’ (1992) 8 Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Problems 73 at 92.Google ScholarPubMed
Magnusson, R., ‘Proprietary rights in human tissue’, in Palmer, N. and McKendrick, E. (eds.), Interests in Goods (London: Lloyds of London Press, 1993) 237 at 248Google Scholar
Fletcher, R., Fox, M. and McCandless, J., ‘Legal embodiment: Analysing the body of healthcare law’ (2008) 16(3) Medical Law Review321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dickenson, D., Property in the Body: Feminist Perspectives (Cambridge University Press, 2007), p. 28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nwabueze, R., Biotechnology and the Challenge of Property: Property Rights in Dead Bodies, Body Parts and Genetic Information (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007), pp. 38–41Google Scholar
Hardcastle, R., Law and the Human Body (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2007)Google Scholar
Whitty, N., ‘Rights of personality, property rights and the human body in Scots law’ (2004–5) 9 Edinburgh Law Review 194 at 221Google Scholar
Nwabueze, R., ‘Donated organs, property rights and the remedial quagmire’ (2008) 16(2) Medical Law Review201CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beyleveld, D. and Brownsword, R., Dignity in Bioethics and Biolaw (Oxford University Press, 2001)Google Scholar
Beyleveld, D. and Brownsword, R., ‘My body, my body parts, my property?’ (2000) 8 Health Care Analysis87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Price, D., ‘The Human Tissue Act 2004’ (2005) 68(5) Modern Law Review798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, C., ‘Body, self, and the property paradigm’ (1992) 22(5) Hastings Center Report 34 at 36Google ScholarPubMed
Childress, J., ‘Ethical criteria for procuring and distributing organs for transplantation’ (1989) 14(1) Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 87 at 89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brazier, M., ‘Organ retention and return: Problems of consent’ (2003) 29 Journal of Medical Ethics 30 at 32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andrews, L.; ‘My body, my property’ (1986) 16(5) Hastings Center Report28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mason, J. and Laurie, G., 7th edn., Mason and McCall Smith’s Law and Medical Ethics (Oxford University Press, 2006)Google Scholar
Dworkin, G. and Kennedy, I., ‘Human tissue: Rights in the body and its parts’ (1993) 1(3) Medical Law Review 291 at 298CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sperling, D., Posthumous Interests: Legal and Ethical Perspectives (Cambridge University Press, 2008), p. 96.Google Scholar
Prosser, W. and Keeton, D., The Law of Torts, 2nd edn. (St. Paul, MN: West Publishing, 1955), pp. 43–4.Google Scholar
Price, D., Legal and Ethical Aspects of Organ Transplantation (Cambridge University Press, 2000)Google Scholar
Harris, , ‘Who owns my body’ (1996) 16 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 55 at 59CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munzer, S., A Theory of Property (Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp. 44–56.Google Scholar
Grubb, A., ‘“I, me, mine”: Bodies, parts and property’ (1998) 3 Medical Law International299CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Penner, J., The Idea of Property (Oxford University Press, 1997), pp. 113 and 128Google Scholar
Merrill, T., ‘Property and the right to exclude’ (1998) 77 Nebraska Law Review730.Google Scholar
Campbell, K., ‘On the general nature of property rights’ (2001) 2 Theoretical Inquiries in Law 79 at 81Google Scholar
Cohen, G., Self-ownership, Freedom, and Equality (Cambridge University Press, 1995), p. 73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arneson, R., ‘Lockean self-ownership: Towards a demolition’ (1991) 39 Political Studies 36 at 36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calder, G., ‘Ownership rights and the body’ (2006) 15 Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 89 at 92CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Joraleman, D. and Cox, P., ‘Body values: The case against compensating for transplant organs’ (2003) 33(1) Hastings Center Report27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giordano, S., ‘Is the body a republic?’ (2005) 31 Journal of Medical Ethics470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steiner, H., An Essay on Rights (Oxford: Blackwell, 1994).Google Scholar
Quigley, M., ‘Property and the body: Applying Honoré’ (2007) 33 Journal of Medical Ethics631CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nozick, R., Anarchy, State and Utopia (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1974), p. 174Google Scholar
Coval, S., Smith, J. and Coval, S., ‘The foundations of property and property law’ (1986) 45 Cambridge Law Journal 457 at 465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, J. W., Property and Justice (Oxford University Press, 1996), p. 188.Google Scholar
Munzer, S., ‘Kant and property rights in body parts’ (1993) 6(2) Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 319 at 321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farsides, C., ‘Body ownership’, in Wheeler, S. and McVeigh, S. (eds.), Law, Health and Medical Regulation (Aldershot: Dartmouth, 1992) 35 at 37.Google Scholar
Hacking, I., ‘The Cartesian body’ (2006) 1 Biosocieties 13 at 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
also Naffine, N., ‘The legal structure of self-ownership: Or the self-possessed man and the woman possessed’ (1998) 25(2) Journal of Law and Society 193 at 200–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyde, A., Bodies of Law (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1997), pp. 19–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calabresi, G., ‘An introduction to legal thought: Four approaches to law and to the allocation of body parts’ (2003) 55 Stanford Law Review2113Google ScholarPubMed
Schicktanz, S., ‘Why the way we consider the body matters – reflections on four bioethical perspectives on the human body’ (2007) 2 Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fielding, H., ‘Body measures: Phenomenological considerations of corporeal ethics’ (1998) 23(5) Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 533 at 535.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rao, R., ‘Property, privacy, and the human body’ (2000) 80 Boston University Law Review359.Google ScholarPubMed
Kant, I., Lectures on Ethics (Cambridge University Press, 1997), p. 157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluge, E.-H., ‘Organ donation and retrieval: Whose body is it anyway?’, in Kuhse, H. and Singer, P. (eds.), Bioethics: An Anthology (London: Blackwell, 2006) 483 at 483–4.Google Scholar
Radin, M., Reinterpreting Property (University of Chicago Press, 1994), p. 41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarkson, C. and Keating, H., Criminal Law: Text and Materials, 5th edn. (London: Thomson/Sweet & Maxwell, 2003), p. 771.Google Scholar
Brazier, M., ‘Retained organs: Ethics and humanity’ (2002) 22 Legal Studies 550 at 564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, L., Property Rights: Philosophical Foundations (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1977), p. 6Google Scholar
Chadwick, R., ‘The market for bodily parts: Kant and duties to oneself’, in Almond, B. and Hill, D. (eds.), Applied Philosophy: Morals and Metaphysics in Contemporary Debate (London: Routledge, 1991) 288 at 290Google Scholar
Kant, I., ‘Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals’ (1785), in Gregor, M. (ed.), Practical Philosophy (Cambridge University Press, 1996) at 37 .Google Scholar
Taylor, J. S., Stakes and Kidneys: Why Markets in Human Body Parts are Morally Imperative (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005), pp. 154–5Google Scholar
Wilkinson, S., Bodies for Sale: Ethics and Exploitation in the Human Body Trade (Oxford: Routledge, 2003)Google Scholar
Litman, M. and Robertson, G., ‘The common law status of genetic material’, in Knoppers, B. et al.(eds.), Legal Rights and Human Genetic Material (Toronto: Emond Montgomery Publications, 1996) 51 at 60.Google Scholar
Kant, I., Lectures on Ethics, trans. Infield, L. (New York: Harper & Row, 1963), pp. 147–8.Google Scholar
Cohen, C., ‘Selling bits and pieces of humans to make babies: The Gift of the Magi revisited’ (1999) 24(3) Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 288 at 293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kant, I., Lectures on Ethics, trans. Infield, L. (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1963), p. 116.Google Scholar
Alldridge, P., ‘The public, the private and the significance of payments’, in Alldridge, P. and Brants, C. (eds.), Personal Autonomy, the Private Sphere and the Criminal Law (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2001) 79.Google Scholar
Dworkin, G., ‘Markets and morals: The case for organ sales’, in Dworkin, G. (ed.), Morality, Harm, and the Law (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994) 155 at 156.Google Scholar
Gold, E., Body Parts: Property Rights and the Ownership of Human Biological Materials (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 1996), pp. 35–40Google Scholar
Radin, M., ‘Market-inalienability’ (1987) 100(8) Harvard Law Review 1849 at 1903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radin, M., Contested Commodities (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996), p. 20Google Scholar
Walzer, M., Spheres of Justice (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1983).Google Scholar
Christman, J., The Myth of Property: Toward an Egalitarian Theory of Ownership (Oxford University Press, 1994), pp. 5 and 18.Google Scholar
Swain, M. and Marusyk, R., ‘An alternative to property rights in human tissue’ (1990) Hastings Center Report 12Google Scholar
Hudson, A., ‘Abandonment’, in Palmer, N. and McKendrick, E. (eds.), Interests in Goods (London: Lloyds of London Press, 1993) 423.Google Scholar
McHale, J., ‘Waste, ownership and bodily products’ (2000) 8 Health Care Analysis123.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hardiman, R., ‘Toward the right of commerciality: Recognizing property rights in the commercial value of human tissue’ (1986) 34 University of California at Los Angeles Law Review 207 at 243–4Google ScholarPubMed
Carter, A., Philosophical Foundations of Property Rights (New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1989), p. 78Google Scholar
Tettenborn, A., ‘Wrongful interference with goods’, in Dugdale, A. (ed.), 19th edn., Clerk and Lindsell on Torts (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2006) 1024.Google Scholar
Brownsword, R., ‘An interest in human dignity as the basis for genomic torts’ (2003) 42 Washburn Law Journal 413 at 472Google ScholarPubMed
Bovenberg, J., Property Rights in Blood, Genes and Data: Naturally Yours? (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2006), p. 134Google Scholar
Parry, B., ‘The new Human Tissue Bill: Categorization and definitional issues and their implications’ (2005) 1(1) Genomics, Society and Policy 74 at 83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pattinson, S., Medical Law and Ethics (London: Thomson/Sweet & Maxwell, 2006), p. 473Google Scholar
Gewirth, A., The Community of Rights (University of Chicago Press, 1996) pp. 187–8.Google Scholar
Childress, J., ‘My body as property: Some philosophical reflections’ (1992) 24(5) Transplantation Proceedings 2143 at 2144.Google Scholar
Honoré, A., ‘Ownership’, in Guest, A. (ed.), Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence, 1st series (Oxford University Press, 1961) 107.Google Scholar
Jaffe, E., ‘She’s got Bette Davis’s eyes: Assessing the non-consensual removal of cadaver organs under the takings and due process clauses’ (1990) 90 Columbia Law Review 528 at 556–60 and 571–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mehlmann, M., ‘Presumed consent to organ donation: A reevaluation’ (1991) 1 Health Matrix 31 at 55.Google Scholar
Berg, J., ‘You say person, I say property: Does it really matter what we call an embryo?’ (2004) 4(1) American Journal of Bioethics17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taupitz, J., ‘The use of human bodily substances and personal data for research: The German National Ethics Council’s Opinion’ (2006) 3 Journal of International Biotechnology Law25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heubel, F., ‘Defining the functional body and its parts: A review of German law’, in Ten, H. Have, Welie, J. and Spicker, S. (eds.), Ownership of the Human Body (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998) 27 at 35.Google Scholar
Paul, E., Miller, F. and Paul, J. (eds.), Property Rights (Cambridge University Press, 1994), p. vii.
Gray, K. and Gray, S., Elements of Land Law, 4th edn. (Oxford University Press, 2005), p. 117.Google Scholar
Beauchamp, T. and Childress, J., Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 6th edn. (Oxford University Press, 2008), p. 352.Google Scholar
Dworkin, R., Taking Rights Seriously (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1977), p. xi.Google Scholar
Bjorkman, B. and Hansson, S., ‘Bodily rights and property rights’ (2006) 32 Journal of Medical Ethics209.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andrews, L. and Nelkin, D., ‘Whose body is it anyway? Disputes over body tissue in a biotechnology age’ (1998) 351 The Lancet 53 at 56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munzer, S., ‘The special case of property rights in umbilical cord blood for transplantation’ (1999) 51 Rutgers Law Review493.Google ScholarPubMed
Laurie, G., Genetic Privacy: A Challenge to Medico-Legal Norms (Cambridge University Press, 2002), p. 316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gitter, D., ‘Ownership of human tissue: A proposal for federal recognition of human research participants’ property rights in their biological material’ (2004) 61 Washington and Lee Law Review257.Google Scholar
Andrews, L., ‘Two perspectives: Rights of donors: Who owns your body? A patient’s perspective on Washington University v. Catalona’ (2006) 34 Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanto, D., ‘Ethical challenges posed by the solicitation of deceased and living organ donors’ (2007) 356 New England Journal of Medicine1062.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spital, A. et al., ‘Solicitation of deceased and living organ donors’ (2007) 356 New England Journal of Medicine2427.Google ScholarPubMed
Cronin, A. and Price, D., ‘Directed donation: Is the donor the owner?’ (2008) 3(3) Clinical Ethics127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Truog, R., ‘Are organs personal property or a societal resource?’ (2005) 5(4) American Journal of Bioethics 14 at 14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glannon, W., ‘The case against conscription of cadaveric organs for transplantation’ (2008) 17 Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 330 at 335.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rudge, C., ‘Transplantation of organs: Natural limitations, possible solutions – a UK perspective’ (2003) 35 Transplantation Proceedings 1149 at 1149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morley, M., ‘Increasing the supply of organs for transplantation through paired organ exchanges’ (2003) 21 Yale Law and Policy Review 221 at 254.Google Scholar
Cohen, L., ‘UNOS: The faithless trustee’ (2005) 5(4) American Journal of Bioethics 13 at 13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Land, W., ‘The dilemma of organ allocation: The combination of a therapeutic modality for an ill individual with the distribution of a scarce valuable public (healing) good’, in Collins, G., Dubernard, J., Land, W. and Persijn, G. (eds.), Procurement, Preservation and Allocation of Vascularized Organs (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1997) 361.Google Scholar
Kreis, H., ‘Whose organs are they, anyway?’, in Weimar, W., Bos, M. and Busschbach, J. (eds.), Organ Transplantation: Ethical, Legal, and Psychosocial Aspects (Lengerich: Pabst Publishing, 2008) 140.Google Scholar
Institute of Medicine Report, Organ Donation: Opportunities for Action (Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2006).Google Scholar
Childress, J., ‘Putting patients first in organ allocation: An ethical analysis of the US debate’ (2001) 10 Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, J. Lindemann, ‘Trusts and transplants’ (2005) 5(4) American Journal of Bioethics 26 at 27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fox, M., ‘Directed organ donation: Donor autonomy and community values’, in Spielman, B. (ed.), Organ and Tissue Donation: Ethical, Legal, and Policy Issues (Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1996) 43 at 47.Google Scholar
Gohh, R., Morrissey, P., Madras, P. and Monaco, A., ‘Controversies in organ donation: The altruistic living donor’ (2001) 16 Nephrology Dialysis Transplant619.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hilhorst, M., ‘Directed altruistic living organ donation: Partial but not unfair’ (2005) 8 Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 197 at 205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilhorst, M., ‘“Living apart together”: Moral frictions between two coexisting organ transplantation schemes’ (2008) 34 Journal of Medical Ethics 484 at 487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ankeny, R., ‘The moral status of preferences for directed donation: Who should decide who gets transplantable organs?’ (2001) 10 Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 387 at 393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Property in human material
  • David Price, De Montfort University, Leicester
  • Book: Human Tissue in Transplantation and Research
  • Online publication: 05 July 2014
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139195652.012
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Property in human material
  • David Price, De Montfort University, Leicester
  • Book: Human Tissue in Transplantation and Research
  • Online publication: 05 July 2014
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139195652.012
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Property in human material
  • David Price, De Montfort University, Leicester
  • Book: Human Tissue in Transplantation and Research
  • Online publication: 05 July 2014
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139195652.012
Available formats
×