PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Directed Tissue Donation”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 235 records · Page 13Linked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

Abortion and fetal tissue research: some ethical concerns.

Proponents of human fetal tissue research argue that this endeavor is morally separate from abortion. They claim that one's views about the morality of abortion should not effect decisions about the ethics of fetal tissue research and transplantation efforts. In lifting the ban on federal funding for fetal tissue research, President Clinton embraced this logic. However, a careful review of (1) the impact fetal tissue research and transplantation will have on the rate of abortion; (2) the concept of informed consent, and (3) the question of complicity demonstrates that abortion and fetal tissue research are morally connected.

Aborted Fetus↗
PubMed2004

Medicolegal issues in paediatric practice: proceedings of the 4th Northern Regional Paediatric Colloquium.

Ethical dilemmas frequently arise in paediatric practice. Given the nature of the speciality, these issues are pertinent to both the medical and legal professions. It is of potential benefit for the professions to meet and discuss such cases outwith the immediate clinical setting. A series of such meetings have been held in the Northern region. We report the proceedings of the fourth meeting. Four cases were presented and the issues arising were debated. The key points from each discussion are described.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Reproductive choice: screening policy and access to the means of reproduction.

The practice of screening potential users of reproductive services is of profound social and political significance. Access screening lacks a defensible rationale, is inconsistent with the principles of equality and self-determination, and violates individual and group human rights. Communities that strive to function in accord with those principles should not permit access to screening, even screening that purports to be a benign exercise of professional discretion. Because reproductive choice is controversial, regulation by law my be required in most jurisdictions to provide effective protection for reproductive rights. In Canada, for example, equal access can, and should be, guaranteed by federal regulations imposing strict conditions on the licenses of fertility clinics.

Access to Information↗
PubMed2004

Creating a stem cell donor: a case study in reproductive genetics.

During the nearly 10 years since its introduction, preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) has been used predominantly to avoid giving birth to a child with identified genetic disease. Recently, PGD was used by a couple not only to test IVF-created embryos for genetic disease, but also to test for a nondisease trait related to immune compatibility with a child in the family in need of an hematropoetic stem cell transplant. This article describes the case, raises some ethical and policy issues, highlights gaps in U.S. policy, and finally makes some recommendations for addressing advancing genetic and reproductive technologies.

Advisory Committees↗
PubMed1993

Bioethical catch-22: the moratorium on federal funding of fetal tissue transplantation research and the NIH revitalization amendments.

In 1988, a moratorium on the use of federal funds for fetal tissue transplantation research (FTTR) halted the promise of a cure for millions of Americans suffering from Parkinson's disease, diabetes, and other debilitating conditions. Since the moratorium began, private and international experimentation continues with mixed success. In the foreground, however, the debate rages over federal funding for fetal tissue transplantation from induced abortions into humans. In the House of Representatives and the Senate, the debate culminated with the passage of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Revitalization Amendments. In addition to authorizing NIH programs, the $5.4 billion bill included measures designed to overturn the moratorium on federal funding for the transplantation research. Brimming with controversy, the bill was forwarded to the White House where it met President Bush's promised veto. The veto was sustained when the House failed to rally the two-thirds majority vote necessary to override a veto, leaving the moratorium intact and the controversy alive. Modified measures were introduced in both Houses of Congress, but a Senate filibuster in the last hours of the session foreclosed a second veto and placed the bill on the 1993 calendar. The field of fetal tissue research, currently a fraction of human health research but with the potential for a six billion dollar industry, is the focus of inevitable controversy. FTTR, as a sub-field, presents a volatile combination of the politics of abortion, the international research race, and the cries of millions of Americans suffering from Parkinson's disease and other crippling debilitations. Thus, using fetal tissue as a potential cure commands the interest and the passion of many. FTTR from induced abortions distinguishes itself from federally approved fetal tissue research because it connects a potentially beneficial health pursuit with a critically divisive moral issue of our day--abortion. By its very nature, FTTR cannot automatically enjoy the approval given to other research pursuits, primarily because at its very core lies an unresolved ethical issue. This issue is found in the connection between the procedures of aborting the fetus, harvesting the tissue, and transplanting it into a needy recipient. Unlike transplantation from ectopic pregnancies or spontaneous abortions, which are permitted by the ban, FTTR directly links decisions and procedures immersed in the moral controversy over induced abortion. This Comment outlines the debate over the transplantation research affected by the moratorium on the use of federal funds for FTTR. Whether fetal tissue from induced abortions should be procured for transplantation into humans, and if so, how its use can be regulated is a significant contemporary challenge for public policy makers. Part I of this Comment delineates the formation of public policy on the issue. Part II explains the content of the NIH Amendments as a new direction for public policy. Part III discusses the potential benefits and risks of federal funding of FTTR. Finally, part IV addresses whether the executive ban or the legislative measure is a sound, farsighted public policy.

Aborted Fetus↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Organs for all.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Cadaver↗