Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface
- Table of cases cited
- Table of selected statutory sources
- Introduction
- 1 Human biological materials
- 2 Interests in the living body and corpse
- 3 Eliciting wishes
- 4 Consent to donation
- 5 Presumed consent
- 6 Informed consent
- 7 Living donation
- 8 Property in human material
- Conclusion
- Index
- References
5 - Presumed consent
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 July 2014
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface
- Table of cases cited
- Table of selected statutory sources
- Introduction
- 1 Human biological materials
- 2 Interests in the living body and corpse
- 3 Eliciting wishes
- 4 Consent to donation
- 5 Presumed consent
- 6 Informed consent
- 7 Living donation
- 8 Property in human material
- Conclusion
- Index
- References
Summary
Presumed consent is a central and perennial topic of transplantation debates in particular, and is viewed by many as a panacea for an insufficient supply of organs and tissues. Yet there are few topics in this sphere as divisive and productive of so much controversy and confusion. Indeed, its very character as a donation policy is something of an enigma. For my purposes here, I take ‘presumed consent’ to refer broadly to consent to be found in the failure to communicate an objection. As a matter of law, such regimes may be either hard (strong) or soft (weak). In the former, removal and use is permissible unless the deceased objected during his/her lifetime. For instance, in Austria, organs may be removed from a deceased person unless the physician is possessed of information that the individual refused consent to donation prior to death. Poland has a similar law. In weak systems, a relative (or relatives) reasonably contactable after death must also be offered an opportunity to veto donation by way of an objection. These form the majority.
In the UK presumed consent has very recently moved – surprisingly in view of its rejection in the debates leading to the Human Tissue Act 2004 – to the top of the political agenda, with the Government-established Organ Donation Taskforce (ODT) being requested to take it on board. It was also a major topic included in the US Institute of Medicine (IOM) Report, Organ Donation: Opportunities for Action, in 2006. The ODT and the IOM both considered that presumed consent should not be introduced in their respective jurisdictions at the present time. By contrast, the German National Ethics Council recently recommended that presumed consent be introduced in Germany, and the Indian Government is planning to introduce a presumed consent law (initially for corneas only). Policies have been much influenced by geographical location and social, juridical and cultural background and milieu, with the majority of European nations adopting presumed consent but relatively few others. However, even where a presumed consent is embedded in law, this is no guarantee that it is rigorously practised by all or even most professionals on the ground.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Human Tissue in Transplantation and ResearchA Model Legal and Ethical Donation Framework, pp. 122 - 167Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2009
References
, Organ Donation: Opportunities for Action (Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2006)Google Scholar
, Increasing the Number of Organ Donations: A Pressing Issue for Transplant Medicine in Germany (Berlin: German National Ethics Council, 2007)Google Scholar
, ‘From Cosmos and Damien to van Velzen: The human tissue saga continues’ (2003) 11 Medical Law Review1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Death, Dissection and the Destitute, 2nd edn. (London: Phoenix Press, 2001), p. 421.Google Scholar
, Black Markets: The Supply and Demand of Body Parts (Cambridge University Press, 2006), p. 123Google Scholar
, ‘The case for presumed consent to transplant human organs after death’ (1992) 24(5) Transplantation Proceedings2168 at 2169.Google ScholarPubMed
and , ‘Respecting the living means respecting the dead too’ (2008) 28(2) Oxford Journal of Legal Studies297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , ‘Legislation on organ and tissue donation’, in , and (eds.), Organ and Tissue Donation for Transplantation (London: Arnold, 1997), p. 101Google Scholar
, ‘Improving organ retrieval rates: Various proposals and their ethical validity’ (2000) 8 Health Care Analysis 279 at 286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, ‘The myth of presumed consent’, in , Transplantation Ethics (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2000)167 at 168Google Scholar
and , ‘Routine antenatal HIV testing: The responses and perceptions of pregnant women and the viability of informed consent. A qualitative study’ (2008) 33 Journal of Medical Ethics329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Human dissection and organ donation: A historical and social background’ (2006) 11(2) Mortality 151 at 161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Does it matter whether there is public policy for presumed consent in organ transplantation?’ (1991) 12 Whittier Law Review505.Google ScholarPubMed
, ‘Autopsy’, in and (eds.), Ownership of the Human Body (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998) 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘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 535–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Over my dead body: Recognizing property rights in corpses’ (1996) 29 Journal of Health and Hospital Law238Google ScholarPubMed
, ‘Forced organ donation: The presumed consent to organ donation laws of the various states and the United States constitution’ (1998–9) 9 Albany Law Journal of Science and Technology349Google Scholar
and , ‘Organ donation and regulation’, in , and (eds.), Systems of Donor Recruitment (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1992) 113 at 116.Google Scholar
, ‘Another look at the presumed-versus-informed consent dichotomy in postmortem organ procurement’ (2006) 20(6) Bioethics 293 at 294.Google Scholar
, Legal and Ethical Aspects of Organ Transplantation (Cambridge University Press, 2000)Google Scholar
, ‘Organ donation as national service: A proposed federal organ donation law’ (1993) 27 Suffolk University Law Review1593 at 1598.Google ScholarPubMed
, ‘Community and rights’, in (ed.), Morality, Harm, and the Law (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994) 36.Google Scholar
, ‘Bereavement, decision-making and the family in organ donation’, in , and (eds.), Organ Shortage: Ethics, Law and Pragmatism (Cambridge University Press, forthcoming 2010).Google Scholar
, ‘Implied, presumed and waived consent: The relative moral wrongs of under- and over-informing’ (2007) 7(12) Bioethics 39 at 40.Google ScholarPubMed
, ‘European biolaw in the making: The example of the rules governing the removal of organs from deceased persons in the EU Member States’, in , , and (eds.), New Pathways for European Bioethics (Antwerp: Intersentia, 2007) 161Google Scholar
, ‘Human trafficking: Legal issues in presumed consent laws’ (2005) 30 North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation 685 at 722.Google Scholar
, Practical Reasoning in Bioethics (Bloomington, IL.: Indiana University Press, 1997), p. 227.Google Scholar
, Moral Principles and Policical Obligations, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1979) pp. 80–1Google Scholar
and , ‘Presumed consent or contracting out’ (1999) 25 Journal of Medical Ethics365CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and , ‘The myth of presumed consent’, in , Transplantation Ethics (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2000), pp. 167–74.Google Scholar
and , ‘Presumed consent for transplantation: A dead issue after Alder Hey?’ (2003) 29 Journal of Medical Ethics 147 at 149CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, ‘“Because you’re worth it?” The taking and selling of transplantable organs’ (2006) 32 Journal of Medical Ethics 324 at 325CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, ‘Mandated choice: A plan to increase public commitment to organ donation’ (1995) 273(6) Journal of the American Medical Association504.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , , , , , and , ‘How large is the organ donor potential in Germany? Results of an analysis of data collected on deceased with primary and secondary brain damage in intensive care unit from 2002 to 2005’ (2007) 20 Transplant International147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and , ‘Gift of life or sacrifice? Key discourses for understanding decision-making by families of organ donors’, in and (eds.), Organ and Tissue Donation: An Evidence Base for Practice (Maidenhead: Open University Press, 2007) 40 at 41Google Scholar
, ‘Organ donation in the United States’ (2003) 3(Suppl. 4) American Journal of Transplantation 29 at 31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, ‘Informed or presumed consent legislative models’, in , and (eds.), Organ and Tissue Donation for Transplantation (London: Arnold, 1997) 344 at 354Google Scholar
, ‘Organ shortage – what to do?’ (1992) 24(6) Transplantation Proceedings2391 at 2392.Google ScholarPubMed
, ‘Utilizing the bodies of the dead’ (1984) 28 Saint Louis University Law Journal 889 at 891.Google Scholar
, ‘Property, harm and the corpse’ in , , , and (eds.), Death and Death Rites (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2007) 199.Google Scholar
, ‘Precious commodities: The supply and demand of body parts: Do presumed-consent laws raise organ procurement rates?’ (2006) 55 De Paul Law Review 1017 at 1026–31Google Scholar
, ‘Organ procurement rates: Does presumed consent legislation really make a difference?’ (2004) 1 Law, Social Justice and Global Development JournalGoogle Scholar
, and , ‘Consent systems for post mortem organ donation in Europe’ [2004] 11 European Journal of Health Law 175 at 177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘The bed of life: A discussion of organ donation, its legal and scientific history, and a recommended “opt-out” solution to organ scarcity’ (2002–2003) 32 Stetson Law Review 855 at 886Google Scholar
, , and , ‘Opting-out systems: No guarantee for higher donation rates’ (2005) 18(11) Transplant International1275.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and , ‘Postmortem and living organ donation in Europe’ (1992) 24 Transplantation Proceedings2165.Google Scholar
, , , and , ‘Presumed consent and other predictors of cadaveric organ donation in Europe’ (2003) 13(1) Progress in Transplantation17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , ‘The impact of presumed consent legislation on cadaveric organ donation: A cross-country study’ (2006) 25(4) Journal of Health Economics599.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, ‘Factors influencing the adaptation of the Spanish Model of organ donation’ (2003) 16 Transplant International736.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and , ‘Public policy, public opinion, and consent for organ donation’ (2001) 10 Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics377CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, ‘Should the State have rights to your organs? Dissecting Brazil’s mandatory organ donation law’ (1998–9) 30 University of Miami Inter-American Law Review707Google Scholar
, ‘Brazil abolishes “presumed consent” in organ donation’ (1998) 352 The Lancet1367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Is presumed consent the answer to organ shortages?’ (2007) 334 British Medical Journal1089.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, ‘Ethics and research with deceased patients’ (2008)17 Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 87 at 93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, ‘Organ donation and retrieval: Whose body is it anyway?’, in and (eds.), Bioethics: An Anthology (London: Blackwell, 2006) 483 at 485.Google Scholar
et al., ‘How to improve organ donation: Results of the ISHLT/FACT poll’ (2003) 22 Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation 389 at 395.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, Biotechnology and the Challenge of Property: Property Rights in Dead Bodies, Body Parts and Genetic Information (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007), p. 167Google Scholar
, ‘Evidence of support for biobanking practices’ (2008) 337 British Medical Journal at 338.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed