The Supreme Court of California ruled in opposition to Moore. There primary reasoning stated was that when the tissue is removed and left with the doctor in their office or lab then the owner of that tissue has “abandoned” it and thus the doctor can claim it as theirs and take prior ownership to do as they wish with it. With specifics to Moore, they claim that his abandoned cells weren’t his anymore and that they have become a new product due to Golde’s imagination. The tissue was looked at as trash and if it was left in a lab or office then they can become property, and no longer have the rights beyond that point. The court also brought up two other crucial consequences in their decision, but if they ruled in Moore’s favor then these repercussions will occur. The other two points were that, the researcher or doctor must have consent of the patient before removing any tissue, even though there was no direct law that mentioned it. And that this would destroy and hinder many scientist research, product and profit increase. They didn’t rule in Moore’s favor because of these two reasons and their own professional reasoning. (Skloot 204-205)
The scientific research was most definitely only a scapegoat, not a reason. If Golde were truly concerned about the benefits his research would bring other people, he would have made Moore aware of the situation somewhere along the seven years that Moore kept visiting him. Even after the seven years, Golde could have informed Moore about the research he was doing while he was harassing him, including the several calls he made to Moore's parents' house and the letters he sent to Moore in Seattle. The other argument was worded in a way that was manipulated to favor Golde's "$3 billion" (Skloot 201) cell line. Just like a detective can take any DNA samples left on discarded items, the hospital is allowed to use tissue samples that are supposed to be discarded. Still, Moore was only informed of the surgery that was going to be conducted on him to remove the tissue and he agreed that the hospital could "dispose of any severed tissue or member by cremation," (Skloot 199) but he was never informed of his genetic information being published for the scientific world to feast their eyes upon.
The Supreme Court of California ruled in opposition to Moore. There primary reasoning stated was that when the tissue is removed and left with the doctor in their office or lab then the owner of that tissue has “abandoned” it and thus the doctor can claim it as theirs and take prior ownership to do as they wish with it. With specifics to Moore, they claim that his abandoned cells weren’t his anymore and that they have become a new product due to Golde’s imagination. The tissue was looked at as trash and if it was left in a lab or office then they can become property, and no longer have the rights beyond that point. The court also brought up two other crucial consequences in their decision, but if they ruled in Moore’s favor then these repercussions will occur. The other two points were that, the researcher or doctor must have consent of the patient before removing any tissue, even though there was no direct law that mentioned it. And that this would destroy and hinder many scientist research, product and profit increase. They didn’t rule in Moore’s favor because of these two reasons and their own professional reasoning. (Skloot 204-205)
ReplyDeleteThe scientific research was most definitely only a scapegoat, not a reason. If Golde were truly concerned about the benefits his research would bring other people, he would have made Moore aware of the situation somewhere along the seven years that Moore kept visiting him. Even after the seven years, Golde could have informed Moore about the research he was doing while he was harassing him, including the several calls he made to Moore's parents' house and the letters he sent to Moore in Seattle. The other argument was worded in a way that was manipulated to favor Golde's "$3 billion" (Skloot 201) cell line. Just like a detective can take any DNA samples left on discarded items, the hospital is allowed to use tissue samples that are supposed to be discarded. Still, Moore was only informed of the surgery that was going to be conducted on him to remove the tissue and he agreed that the hospital could "dispose of any severed tissue or member by cremation," (Skloot 199) but he was never informed of his genetic information being published for the scientific world to feast their eyes upon.
Delete