Journal
GENETICS IN MEDICINE
Volume 14, Issue 4, Pages 473-477Publisher
NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/gim.2012.10
Keywords
biobanking; ethics; genetics; law; policy; return of results
Categories
Funding
- National Institutes of Health/National Human Genome Research Institute (NIH/NHGRI) [5U01 HG004603-03, 2R01 HG003178]
- Baylor College of Medicine
- Baylor Annual Fund
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Published guidelines suggest that research results and incidental findings should be offered to study participants under some circumstances. Although some have argued against the return of results in research, many cite an emerging consensus that there is an ethical obligation to return at least some results; the debate quickly turns to issues of mechanics (e.g., which results? who discloses? for how long does the obligation exist?). Although commentators are careful to distinguish this as an ethical rather than legal obligation, we worry that return of results may unjustifiably become standard of care based on this growing consensus, which could quickly lead to a legal (negligence-based) duty to offer and return individualized genetic research results. We caution against this and argue in this essay that the debate to date has failed to give adequate weight to a number of fundamental ethical and policy issues that should undergird policy on return of research results in the first instance, many of which go to the fundamental differences between research and clinical care. We confine our comments to research using data from large biobanks, the topic of the guidelines proposed in this symposium issue.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available