Property in the Body
Buy print or eBook
[Opens in a new window] Feminist Perspectives
Book contents
- Property in the Body
- Cambridge Bioethics and Law
- Property in the Body: Feminist Perspectives
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Preface to the Second Edition
- Preface to the First Edition
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Do We All Have Feminised Bodies Now?
- 2 Commodification, Contract and Labour
- 3 The Lady Vanishes: Eggs for Reproduction and Research
- 4 Surrogacy: Can Babies Be Property?
- 5 Umbilical Cord Blood Banks: Seizing Surplus Value
- 6 Biobanks and Databases: Our Bodies, but Not Ourselves
- 7 The Gender Politics of Genetic Patenting
- 8 Reclaiming the Biomedical Commons
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
Bibliography
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 May 2017
Book contents
- Property in the Body
- Cambridge Bioethics and Law
- Property in the Body: Feminist Perspectives
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Preface to the Second Edition
- Preface to the First Edition
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Do We All Have Feminised Bodies Now?
- 2 Commodification, Contract and Labour
- 3 The Lady Vanishes: Eggs for Reproduction and Research
- 4 Surrogacy: Can Babies Be Property?
- 5 Umbilical Cord Blood Banks: Seizing Surplus Value
- 6 Biobanks and Databases: Our Bodies, but Not Ourselves
- 7 The Gender Politics of Genetic Patenting
- 8 Reclaiming the Biomedical Commons
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Property in the BodyFeminist Perspectives, pp. 169 - 196Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2017
References
Abouzahr, C., ‘Antepartum and postpartum haemorrhage’ in Murray, C. J. L. and Lopez, A. D. (eds), Health Dimensions of Sex and Reproduction (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), pp. 172–74Google Scholar
Alberta, Hillary B., Berry, Roberta M., and Levine, Aaron D., ‘Risk disclosure and the recruitment of oocyte donors: are advertisers telling the full story?’ (2014) 42 Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 232–43CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Allan, Sonia, ‘Surrogate mother cares for baby abandoned because of Down Syndrome’, Biopolitical Times, 4 August 2014, accessed 21 August 2014, www.biopoliticaltimes.rsvp1.com/article.php?id=7953&mgh=www.biopoliticaltimes.org&mgf=1Google Scholar
Allen, Anita L., ‘Surrogacy, slavery, and the ownership of life’ (1990) 13 Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy 139–50Google ScholarPubMed
Almeling, Rene, Sex Cells: The Medical Market in Eggs and Sperm (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), Opinion Number 183, Routine Storage of Umbilical Cord Blood for Potential Future Transplantation (Washington, DC: ACOG, 1997)Google Scholar
Anderson, Elizabeth, ‘Is women's labor a commodity?’ (1990) 19 Philosophy and Public Affairs 71–92Google ScholarPubMed
Anderson, Elizabeth, Value in Ethics and Economics (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993)Google Scholar
Andorno, Roberto, ‘Population genetic databases: a new challenge to human rights’ in Lenk, Christian, Hoppe, Nils and Andorno, Roberto (eds), Ethics and Law of Intellectual Property: Current Problems in Politics, Science and Technology (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2006), Chapter 2Google Scholar
Andrews, Lori B., ‘Control and compensation: laws regulating extracorporeal generative materials’ (1989) 14 Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 541–60CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andrews, Lori B., ‘Beyond doctrinal boundaries: a legal framework for surrogate motherhood’ (1995) 81 Virginia Law Review 2343–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, Lori B., ‘Genes and patent policy: rethinking intellectual property rights’ (2002) 3 Nature Reviews Genetics 803–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andrews, Lori B., ‘Harnessing the benefits of biobanks’ (2005) 33 Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 1CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andrews, Lori B., ‘Shared patenting experiences: the role of patients’, paper presented at the fifth workshop of the European Commission PropEur project, Bilbao, December 2005Google Scholar
Angrist, Misha, ‘Eyes wide open: the personal genome project, citizen science and veracity in informed consent’ (2009) 6 Personalized Medicine 691CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Annas, George J., ‘Waste and longing: the legal status of placental blood banking’ (1999) 340 New England Journal of Medicine 1521–24CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arendt, Hannah, The Human Condition (2nd edn, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aristotle, , ‘The generation of animals’ (trans. Ogle, W.) in McKeon, R. (ed.), The Basic Works of Aristotle (New York: Random House, 1941), pp. 665–88Google Scholar
Armitage, S., Warwick, R., Fehily, D., Navarrete, C. and Contreras, M., ‘Cord blood banking in London: the first 1000 collections’ (1999) 24 Bone Marrow Transplant 139–45CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arneson, Richard, ‘Lockean self-ownership: towards a demolition’ (1991) 39 Political Studies 54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arneson, Richard, ‘Commodification and commercial surrogacy’ (1992) 21(2) Philosophy and Public Affairs 132–64Google ScholarPubMed
Attas, Daniel, ‘Freedom and self-ownership’ (2000) 26 Social Theory and Practice 1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aubry, C. M. and Rau, F. F., Cours de droit civil français (Brussels: Méline, Cans, 1850)Google Scholar
Ayme, Segolene, Matthijs, Gert and Soini, S., ‘Patenting and licensing in genetic testing: recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics’ (2008) 16 European Journal of Human Genetics 405–11CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baghari, Alireza, ‘Compensated kidney exchange: a review of the Iranian model’ (2006) 16 Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 269–82Google Scholar
Ball, Nan T., ‘The reemergence of Enlightenment ideas in the 1994 French bioethics debates’ (2000) 50 Duke Law Journal 545–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ballen, Karen, ‘Challenges in umbilical cord blood stem cell banking for stem cell reviews and reports’ (2010) 6(8) Stem Cell Review and Reports 8–14CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barker, Juliet N. and Wagner, John E., ‘Umbilical-cord blood transplantation for the treatment of cancer’ (2003) 3 Nature Reviews Cancer 526–32CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barker, J. N., Weisdorf, D. J., DeFor, T. E. et al., ‘Rapid and complete donor chimerism in adult recipients of unrelated donor umbilical cord blood transplantation after reduced-intensity conditioning’ (2003) 102 Blood 1915–19CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barrett, Ann, Roques, Tom and Small, Matthew, ‘How much will Herceptin really cost?’ (2006) 333 British Medical Journal 1118–20CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baud, Jean-Pierre, L'affaire de la main volée: une histoire juridique du corps (Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1993)Google Scholar
Baylis, Francoise, ‘Animal eggs for stem cell research: a path not worth taking’ (2008) 8 American Journal of Bioethics 18–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baylis, Francoise, ‘For love or money? The saga of the Korean women who provided eggs for stem cell research’ (2009) 30 Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 385–96CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baylis, Francoise, ‘The ethics of creating children with three genetic parents’ (2013) 26 Reproductive Biomedicine Online 531CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baylis, Francoise and McLeod, Carolyn, ‘The stem cell debate continues: the buying and selling of eggs for research’ (2007) 33 Journal of Medical Ethics 726–31CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baylis, Francoise and Roberts, J. S., ‘Radical rupture: exploring biological sequelae of volitional inheritable genetic modification’ in Rasko, J. E. J., O'Sullivan, G. M. and Ankeny, R. A. (eds), The Ethics of Inheritable Genetic Modification (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), pp. 131–48Google Scholar
Beauchamp, Tom L. and Childress, James F., Principles of Biomedical Ethics (3rd edn, New York: Oxford University Press, 1989)Google Scholar
Becker, Gary S., A Treatise on the Family (enlarged edn, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beeson, Diane, ‘Dangerous harvest’, Council for Responsible Genetics, Genewatch, www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/genewatch/GeneWatchPage.aspx?pageId=312, accessed 13 June 2016Google Scholar
Beeson, Diane, Darnovsky, Marcy and Lippman, Abby, ‘What's in a name? Variations in terminology of third-party reproduction’ (2015) 31 Reproductive Biomedicine Online 805–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellivier, Florence and Noiville, Christine, ‘The commercialisation of human biomaterials: what are the rights of donors of biological materials?’, paper presented at seminar at Faculté de Droit, Université de Paris-I, October 2004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellivier, Florence and Noiville, Christine, ‘La circulation du vivant humain: modèle de la propriéte óu du contrat?’, paper presented at seminar at Faculté de Droit, Université de Paris-I, October 2004Google Scholar
Berg, Jessica W., ‘Risky business: evaluating oocyte donation’ (2001) 1(4) American Journal of Bioethics 18–19CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bertomeu, Maria Julia and Sommer, Susanna E., ‘Patents on genetic material: a new originary accumulation’ in Tong, Rosemarie, Donchin, Anne and Dodds, Susan (eds), Linking Visions: Feminist Bioethics, Human Rights and the Developing World (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2004), pp. 183–202Google Scholar
Beskow, Laura M., Namey, Emily E., Cadigan, R. Jean et al, ‘Research participants’ perspectives on genotype-driven research recruitment’ (2011) 6(4) Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics 3–20CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beyleveld, Derek and Brownsword, Roger, ‘Patenting human genes: legality, morality and human rights’ in Harris, J. W. (ed.), Property Problems: From Genes to Pension Funds (London: Kluwer Law International, 1997), pp. 9–24Google Scholar
Bjorkman, Barbro, ‘Why we are not allowed to sell that which we are encouraged to donate’ (2006) 15 Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 60–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bjorkman, B. and Hansson, B. O., ‘Bodily rights and property rights’ (2006) 32 Journal of Medical Ethics 209–14CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bodri, D., Guillen, J. J., Polo, A. et al., ‘Complications resulting from oocyte stimulation and oocyte retrieval in 4,052 oocyte donor cycles’ (2008) 17(2) Reproductive Biomedicine Online 237–43Google Scholar
Boggio, Andrea, ‘Charitable trusts and human research genetic databases: the way forward?’ (2005) 1(2) Genomics, Society and Policy 41–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boseley, Sarah, ‘NHS to scrap single database of patients’ medical details’ (2016) The Guardian, 5 July, www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/06/nhs-to-scrap-single-database-of-patients-medical-details, accessed 2 August 2016Google Scholar
Bostyn, S. J. R., ‘One patent a day keeps the doctor away? Patenting human genetic information and health care’ (2000) 7 European Journal of Health Law 229–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bovenberg, Jasper A., ‘Towards an international system of ethics and governance for biobanks: a “special status” for genetic data?’ (2005) 15(4) Critical Public Health 369–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bovenberg, Jasper and Van Dam, F., ‘Always expect the unexpected: legal and social aspects of reporting biobank research results to individual research participants’ (Nijmegen: Radboud University Centre for Society and Genomics, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, James, Shamans, Software and Spleens: Law and the Construction of the Information Society (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, James, ‘The second enclosure movement and the construction of the public domain’ (2003) 66 Law and Contemporary Problems 33–74Google Scholar
Brace, Laura, The Politics of Property: Labour, Freedom and Belonging (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2004)Google Scholar
Braverman, Andrea M., ‘Exploring ovum donors’ motivations and needs’ (2001) 1(4) American Journal of Bioethics 16–17CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brazier, Margaret, ‘Embryos, property or people’ (1996) 8 Contemporary Reviews in Obstetrics and Gynaecology 50Google Scholar
Brazier, Margaret, ‘Can you buy children?’ (1999) 11 Child and Family Law Quarterly 345–54Google Scholar
Brenkert, George, ‘Self-ownership, freedom and autonomy’ (1998) 2 Journal of Ethics 27–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Nik, ‘Contradictions of value – between use and exchange in the cord blood bioeconomy’ (2013) 35 Sociology of Health and Illness 97–112CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, Nik, Machin, Laura and McLeod, Danae, ‘The immunitary bioeconomy: the economisation of life in the international cord blood market’ (2011) 30 Social Science and Medicine 1–8Google Scholar
Brownsword, Roger, ‘Biobank governance: property, privacy and consent’ in Lenk, Christian, Hoppe, Nils and Andorno, Roberto (eds), Ethics and Law of Intellectual Property: Current Problems in Politics, Science and Technology (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2006), Chapter 5Google Scholar
Brownsword, Roger, ‘Regulating biobanks: another triple bottom line’ in Pascuzzi, Giovanni, Izzo, Umberto and Macilotti, Matteo (eds), Comparative Issues in the Governance of Research Biobanks: Property, Privacy, Intellectual Property and the Role of Technology (New York: Springer, 2013), pp. 41–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brownsword, Roger, ‘Human dignity from a legal perspective’, in Düwell, Marcus, Braarvig, Jens, Brownsword, Roger and Mieth, Dietmar (eds), The Cambridge Handbook of Human Dignity: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014)Google Scholar
Brownsword, Roger, ‘Big biobanks: three major governance challenges and some mini-constitutional solutions,’ in Stretch, Daniel and Mertz, Marcel (eds), Ethics in Clinical and Translational Research – From Theory to Practice, from Practice to Theory (New York: Springer, 2016)Google Scholar
Burgio, G. R., Gluckman, Eliane and Locatelli, Franco, ‘Ethical reappraisal of 15 years of cord-blood transplantation’ (2003) 361 Lancet 250–52CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burgstaller, J. P., Johnston, G., Jones, N. S. et al., ‘MtDNA segregation in heteroplasmic tissues is common in vivo and modulated by haplotype differences and developmental stage’ (2014) 7(6) Cell Reports 2031CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Busby, Helen, ‘The meanings of consent to the donation of cord blood stem cells: perspectives from an interview-based study of a public cord blood bank in England’ (2010) 5(1) Clinical Ethics 22–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calabresi, G. and Melamed, A. D., ‘Property rules, liability rules and inalienability: one view of the cathedral’ (1972) 85 Harvard Law Review 1089–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calderon-Margalit, R., Friedlander, Y., Yanetz, R. et al., ‘Cancer risk after exposure to treatments for ovulation induction’ (2009) 169 American Journal of Epidemiology 365–73Google ScholarPubMed
Callahan, Daniel, ‘Bioethics: private choice and public good’ (1994) 24 Hastings Center Report 28–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callahan, Daniel, ‘Individual good and common good: a communitarian approach to bioethics’ (2003) 46 Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 496–507CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Canadian Biotechnology Advisory Committee, Patenting of Higher Life Forms and Related Issues: Report to the Government of Canada Biotechnology Ministerial Coordinating Committee (Ottawa: Canadian Biotechnology Advisory Committee, 2002)Google Scholar
Canadian Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies, Proceed with Care: Final Report of the Commission on New Reproductive Technologies (Ottawa: Minister of Government Services Canada, 1993)Google Scholar
Capps, Benjamin, ‘Models of biobanks and implications for public health innovation’ (2015) 33 Monash Bioethics Review 238–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Centers for Disease Control and US Department of Health and Human Services, ‘2010 assisted reproductive technology’, National Summary Report (2012) 1–75Google Scholar
Chadwick, Ruth, ‘The Icelandic data base: do modern times need modern sagas?’ (1999) 319 British Medical Journal 441–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chadwick, Ruth, ‘Are genes us? Gene therapy and personal identity’ in Becker, G. K., The Moral Status of Persons (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2000), pp. 183–94Google Scholar
Chadwick, Ruth and Wilson, Sarah, ‘Genomic databases as global public goods?’ (2004) 10 Res Publica 123–34CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Charo, R. Alta, ‘Body of research – ownership and use of human tissue’ (2006) 355 New England Journal of Medicine 1517–19CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cherry, Mark, Kidney for Sale by Owner: Human Organs, Transplantation and the Market (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2005)Google Scholar
Choudhury, Supama, Fishman, Jennifer R., McGowan, Michelle L. and Juengst, Erich T., ‘Big data, open science and the brain: lessons learned from genomics’ (2014) 8 Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 239CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Christman, John, The Myth of Property: Toward an Egalitarian Theory of Ownership (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chrysler, Denise, McGee, Harry, Bach, Janice et al., ‘The Michigan BioTrust for Health: using dried blood samples for research to benefit the community while respecting the individual’ (2011) 39 Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 98–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Cynthia, ‘Selling bits and pieces of humans to make babies: the Gift of the Magi revisited’ (1999) 24 Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 288–306CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, G. A., Self-Ownership, Freedom and Equality (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comité Consultatif National d’Éthique (CCNE), Opinion Number 21: That the Human Body Should Not Be Used for Commercial Purposes (Paris: CCNE, 1990)Google Scholar
Comité Consultatif National d’Éthique (CCNE), Opinion Number 37: That the Human Genome Should Not Be Used for Commercial Purposes (Paris: CCNE, 1991)Google Scholar
Comité Consultatif National d’Éthique (CCNE), Opinion Number 64: L'avant-projet de loi portant transposition, dans le code de la propriété intellectuelle de la directive 98/44/CR du Parlement Européen et du Conseil en date du 6 juillet 1998, relative à la protection juridique des inventions biotechnologiques (Paris: CCNE, 2000)Google Scholar
Comité Consultatif National d’Éthique (CCNE), Opinion Number 74: Umbilical Cord Blood Banks for Autologous Use or for Research (Paris: CCNE, 2002)Google Scholar
Comité Consultatif National d’Éthique (CCNE), Opinion Number 117: Utilisation des cellules souches issues du sang de cordon, du cordon lui-même et du placenta et leur conservation en biobanques (Paris: CCNE, 2012)Google Scholar
Comité Consultatif National d’Éthique (CCNE) and Nationaler Ethikrat (German National Ethics Council), Opinion No. 77: Ethical Problems Raised by the Collected Biological Material and Associated Information Data: ‘Biobanks’, ‘Biolibraries’ (Paris: CCNE, 2003)Google Scholar
Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy (London: Department for International Development, 2002)Google Scholar
Cook, Ann Freeman and Hoas, Helena, ‘Trading places: what the research participant can tell the investigator about informed consent’ (2011) 2 Journal of Clinical Research Bioethics 121Google Scholar
Cooper, Melinda, ‘The living and the dead: variations on De Anima’ (2002) 7 Angelaki: Journal of the Theoretical Humanities 81–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, Melinda, Life as Surplus: Biotechnology and Capitalism in the Neoliberal Era (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2008)Google Scholar
Cooper, Melinda, and Waldby, Catherine, Clinical Labor: Tissue Donors and Research Subjects in the Global Bioeconomy (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2014)Google Scholar
Council for Responsible Genetics, Surrogacy in America (Cambridge, MA: Council for Responsible Genetics, 2010)Google Scholar
Crignon-de Oliveira, Claire and Gaille-Nikodimov, Marie, À qui appartient le corps humain? Médecine, politique et droit (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 2004)Google Scholar
Critchley, Christine R., Nichol, Dianne, Otlowski, Margaret F. A. et al., ‘Predicting intention to biobank: a national survey’ (2012) 22 European Journal of Public Health 139–44CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cyranoski, David, ‘Korean's stem-cell stars dogged by suspicion of ethical breach’ (2004) 429 Nature 3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dagan, Hanoch and Heller, M. A., ‘The liberal commons’, in Dagan, Hanoch, Property: Values and Institutions (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011), Chapter 8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, Herman and Cobb, John, Jr., For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy toward Community, the Environment, and a Sustainable Future (Boston: Beacon Press, 1989)Google Scholar
Danish Council on Ethics, Patenting Human Genes (Copenhagen: Danish Council on Ethics, 1994)Google Scholar
Davey, Sue, Armitage, Sue, Rocha, Vanderson et al., ‘The London Cord Blood Bank: analysis of banking and transplantation outcome’ (2004) 125(3) British Journal of Haematology 358–65CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davidson, Julia O'Connell, Prostitution, Power and Freedom (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1999)Google Scholar
Dawson, A. C., ‘The intellectual commons: a rationale for regulation’ (1998) 16(3) Prometheus 275–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delavigne, A. and Rozenberg, S., ‘Epidemiology and prevention of ovarian hyper-stimulation syndrome (OHSS): a review’ (2002) 8 Human Reproduction Update 559–77Google Scholar
Delphy, Christine, Close to Home: A Materialist Analysis of Women's Oppression, trans. and ed. Leonard, D. (London: Hutchinson, in association with the Explorations in Feminism Collective, 1984)Google Scholar
De Pinha, J. C. and Gibbons, W. E., ‘Medical implications of oocyte donation’, in Goldfarb, James M. (ed.), Third-Party Reproduction: A Comprehensive Guide (New York: Springer, 2014), pp. 3–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devine, Karen, ‘Risky business? The risks and benefits of umbilical cord blood collection’ (2010) 18 Medical Law Review 330–62CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Devine, Karen, ‘Ethics and choice in healthcare: the case of public v. private cord blood banking’, in Priaulx, Nicky and Wrigley, Anthony (eds), Ethics, Law and Society (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2013), pp. 55–68Google Scholar
Dewes, T. K., Hudson, M. and Southey, K., Te Mata Ira: Cultural Constructions and Biobanking (Auckland, New Zealand: Nga Pae o te Maramatanga, 2014)Google Scholar
Dickenson, Donna L., Moral Luck in Medical Ethics and Practical Politics (Aldershot, UK: Avebury, 1991)Google Scholar
Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Procuring gametes for research and therapy: the case for unisex altruism’ (1997) 23 Journal of Medical Ethics 93–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Property and women's alienation from their own reproductive labour’ (2001) 15(3) Bioethics 203–17CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Commodification of human tissue: implications for feminist and development ethics’ (2002) 2(1) Developing World Bioethics 55–63CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Genetic research and the economic paradigm’ [Einwilligung, Kommodifizierung und Vortelsausgleich in der Genforschung] in Honnefelder, L. et al. (eds), Das Genetische Wissen und die Zukunft des Menschen (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2003), pp. 139–51Google Scholar
Dickenson, Donna L., ‘The threatened trade in human ova’ (2004) 5(2) Nature Reviews Genetics 167CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Patently paradoxical? Public order and genetic patents’ (2004) 5 Nature Reviews Genetics 86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Human tissue and global ethics’ (2005) 1(1) Genomics, Society and Policy 41–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickenson, Donna L., ‘The lady vanishes: what's missing from the stem cell debate’ (2006) 3 Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 43–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Ownership, property and women's bodies’, in Widdows, Heather, Idiakez, Itziar Alkorta and Cirion, Aitziber Emaldi (eds), Women's Reproductive Rights (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), pp. 188–98Google Scholar
Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Philosophical assumptions and presumptions about trafficking for prostitution’, in van den Anker, Christien and Doemernik, Jeroen (eds), Trafficking and Women's Rights (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), pp. 43–53Google Scholar
Dickenson, Donna L., ‘An uneasy case against Stephen Munzer: umbilical cord blood and property in the body’ (2009) 8(2) American Philosophical Association Newsletter 11–16Google Scholar
Dickenson, Donna L., Body Shopping: Converting Body Parts to Profit (Oxford: Oneworld, 2009)Google Scholar
Dickenson, Donna L., Me Medicine vs. We Medicine: Reclaiming Biotechnology for the Common Good (New York: Columbia University Press, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Exploitation and choice in the global egg trade: emotive terminology or necessary critique?’ in Goodwin, Michele (ed.), The Global Body Market: Altruism's Limits (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 21–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickenson, Donna L., ‘The commercialization of human eggs in mitochondrial replacement research’ (2013) 19(1) The New Bioethics 18–29CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dickenson, Donna L., ‘Alternatives to a corporate commons: biobanking, genetics and property in the body,’ in Goold, Imogen, Greasley, Kate, Herring, Jonathan and Skene, Loane (eds), Persons, Parts and Property: How Should We Regulate Human Tissue in the 21st Century? (Oxford: Hart, 2014), pp. 177–96Google Scholar
Dickenson, Donna L., ‘The end of cross-border surrogacy?’ (2016) Project Syndicate, 25 February, www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/crackdown-on-international-surrogacy-trade-by-donna-dickenson-2016-02, accessed 26 July 2016Google Scholar
Dickenson, Donna L., ‘The common good’, in Brownsword, Roger, Scotford, Eloise and Yeung, Karen (eds), The Oxford Handbook on Law and Regulation of Technology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, in press)Google Scholar
Dickenson, Donna and Hakim, Nadey, ‘Ethical issues in limb allotransplants’ (1999) 75 Postgraduate Medical Journal 513–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickenson, Donna and Widdershoven, Guy, ‘Ethical issues in limb transplants’ (2001) 15(2) Bioethics 115–24CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dienst, Paul van and Savulescu, Julian, ‘For and against: no consent should be needed for using leftover body material for scientific purposes’ (2002) 325 British Medical Journal 648–51Google Scholar
Dodds, Susan, ‘Women, commodification and embryonic stem cell research’ in Humber, James and Almeder, Robert F. (eds), Biomedical Ethics Reviews: Stem Cell Research (Totowa, NJ: Humana Press, 2003), pp. 149–75Google Scholar
Downey, Candace L. and Bewley, Susan, ‘Third stage practices and the neonate’ (2009) 20(3) Fetal and Maternal Medicine Review 11–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, John, ‘Consent in the political theory of John Locke’ in Dunn, J., Political Obligation in Its Historical Context (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyer, Clare, ‘Patient is to appeal High Court ruling on breast cancer drug’ (2006) 332 British Medical Journal 443Google ScholarPubMed
Ébelpoin, Sylvie, ‘Gestation pour altrui: une asssistance médicale à la procréation comme les autres?’ (2011) 87 Information psychiatrique 573–79Google Scholar
Ecker, Jeffrey L. and Greene, Michael F., ‘The case against private umbilical cord blood banking’ (2005) 105(6) Obstetrics and Gynecology 1282–84CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ecologist, , The, Whose Common Future? Reclaiming the Commons (Philadelphia: New Society, 1998)Google Scholar
Ediezen, Leroy C., ‘NHS maternity units should not encourage commercial banking of umbilical cord blood’ (2006) 333 British Medical Journal 801–4Google Scholar
Eisenberg, Rebecca S., ‘How can you patent genes?’ (2002) 2 American Journal of Bioethics 3–11CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ekman, Kajsa Ekis, Being and Being Bought: Prostitution, Surrogacy and the Split Self, trans. Cheadle, Suzanne Martin (North Melbourne: Spinifex Press, 2013)Google Scholar
Elliott, Carl, White Coat, Black Hat: Adventures on the Dark Side of Medicine (Boston: Beacon Press, 2010)Google Scholar
Elshtain, Jean Bethke, Public Man, Private Woman: Women in Social and Political Thought (Oxford: Martin Robertson, 1984)Google Scholar
Engels, Friedrich, The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State (New York: International, 1972)Google Scholar
English, Veronica, Mussell, Rebecca, Sheather, Julian and Sommerville, Ann, ‘Ethics briefings: retention and use of human tissue’ (2004) 30 Journal of Medical Ethics 235–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, Richard A., ‘Surrogacy: the case for full contractual enforcement’ (1995) 8 Virginia Law Review 2305–41Google Scholar
Ertman, Martha, ‘The upside of baby markets’, in Goodwin, Michele Bratcher (ed.), Baby Markets: Money and the New Politics of Creating Families (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 23–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), ‘Financial incentives in recruitment of oocyte donors’ (2004) 82 Fertility and Sterility supplement S240–42Google Scholar
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), ‘Financial compensation of oocyte donors’ (2007) 88(2) Fertility and Sterility 305–9Google Scholar
European Group on Ethics and New Technologies (EGE), Opinion on the Ethical Aspects of Umbilical Cord Blood Banking, Opinion Number 19, IP/04/364 (Brussels: EGE, 2004)Google Scholar
Fabre, Cecile, Whose Body Is It Anyway? Justice and the Integrity of the Person (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabre-Mangan, Muriel, La gestation pour autrui: Fictions et realités (Paris: Fayard, 2013)Google Scholar
Fagot-Largeault, Anne, ‘Ownership of the human body: judicial and legislative responses in France’ in Have, Henk ten and Welie, Jos (eds), Ownership of the Human Body: Philosophical Considerations on the Use of the Human Body and Its Parts in Healthcare (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1998), pp. 115–40Google Scholar
Feldman, Laura, ‘Utilising property concepts to respond to new risks and challenges posed by medical research’ (2010) paper given at the HeLex centre, University of Oxford, 23 JuneGoogle Scholar
Fenton-Glynn, Claire, ‘The regulation and recognition of surrogacy under English law: an overview of the case-law’ (2015) 27(1) Child and Family Law Quarterly 83–95Google Scholar
Ferguson, Ann, Sexual Democracy: Women, Oppression and Revolution (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1991)Google Scholar
Ferguson, Kathy E., The Man Question: Visions of Subjectivity in Feminist Theory (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandez, M. N., Regidor, C. and Cabrera, R., ‘Letter: Umbilical cord blood transplantation in adults’ (2005) 352 New England Journal of Medicine 935Google ScholarPubMed
Fisk, Nicholas M. and Atun, Rifat, ‘Public-private partnership in cord blood banking’ (2008) 336 British Medical Journal 642–44CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fisk, N. M., Roberts, I. A. G., Markwald, R. and Mironov, V. et al., ‘Can routine commercial cord blood banking be scientifically and ethically justified?’ (2005) 2 PLOS Medicine 2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flegel, Ken, ‘Editorial: Ten reasons to make cord blood stem cells a public good’ (2009) 180 Canadian Medical Association Journal 1279CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fowler, J. H., and Dawes, C. T., ‘Two genes predict voter turnout’ (2007) 70 Journal of Politics 579–94Google Scholar
Fraser, Antonia, The Weaker Vessel: Women's Lot in Seventeenth-Century England (London: Mandarin, 1989)Google Scholar
Fraser, Nancy, Unruly Practices: Power, Discourse and Gender in Contemporary Social Theory (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1989)Google Scholar
Freeman, Michael, ‘Does surrogacy have a future after Brazier?’ (1999) 7 Medical Law Review 1–20CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frow, John, ‘Gift and commodity’ in Frow, J., Time and Commodity Culture: Essays in Cultural Theory and Postmodernity (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gatens, Moira, Feminism and Philosophy: Perspectives on Difference and Equality (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991)Google Scholar
Gerrand, Nicole, ‘The misuse of Kant in the debate about a market in human body parts’ (1999) 16(1) Journal of Applied Philosophy 59–67CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giudice, L., Santa, E. and Pool, R. (eds), Assessing the Medical Risks of Human Oocyte Donation for Stem Cell Research: Workshop Report (Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, National Academies Press, 2007)Google Scholar
Gluckman, E., Broxmeyer, H. A., Auerbach, A. D. et al., ‘Hematopoietic reconstitution in a patient with Fanconi's anemia by means of umbilical-cord blood from an HLA-identical sibling’ (1989) 321 New England Journal of Medicine 1174–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godard, Beatrice, Marshall, Jennifer and Laberge, Claude, ‘Community engagement in genetic research: Results of the first public consultation for the Quebec CARTaGENE project’ (2007) 10 Community Genetics 147–58Google ScholarPubMed
Gold, E. Richard and Cho, Mildred K., ‘Patenting human genetic material: refocusing the debate’ (2000) 1 Nature Reviews Genetics 227–31Google Scholar
Goldacre, Ben, Bad Pharma: How Drug Companies Mislead Doctors and Harm Patients (London: Fourth Estate, 2012)Google Scholar
Goodwin, Michele, Black Markets: The Supply and Demand of Body Parts (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goold, Imogen and Quigley, Muireann, ‘The case for a property approach’, in Goold, Imogen, Greasley, Kate, Herring, Jonathan and Skene, Loane (eds), Persons, Parts and Property: How Should We Regulate Human Tissue in the 21st Century? (Oxford: Hart, 2014), pp. 231–62Google Scholar
Gottlieb, Karen, ‘Human biological samples and the law of property: the trust as a model for biological repositories’, in Weir, R. F. (ed.), Stored Tissue Samples: Ethical, Legal and Public Policy Implications (Iowa City: Iowa University Press, 1998), pp. 183–97Google Scholar
Gottweis, Herbert, and Prainsack, Barbara, ‘Emotion in political discourse: approaches to stem cell governance in the USA, UK, Israel and Germany’ (2006) 6 Reproductive Medicine 823–29Google Scholar
Graff, G. D., Phillips, D., Lei, Z. et al., ‘Not quite a myriad of gene patents’ (2013) 31(5) Nature Biotechnology 404–10CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greeley, Henry T., ‘Moving human embryonic stem cells from legislature to lab: remaining legal and ethical questions’ (2006) 3(5) PLOS Medicine, 28 FebruaryGoogle Scholar
Grey, Thomas, ‘The disintegration of property’ in Pennock, J. P. and Chapman, J. (eds), Nomos XXII: Property (New York: New York University Press, 1980), pp. 69–85Google Scholar
Grubb, Andrew, ‘“I, me mine”: bodies, parts and property’ (1998) 3 Medical Law International 299–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guardian, The, ‘Mexican state votes to ban surrogacy for gay men and foreign people’ (2015) 15 DecemberGoogle Scholar
Gupta, Jyotsna, ‘Postmodern bodies, assisted reproduction and women's agency’, paper presented at the Seventh World International Association of Bioethics conference, Sydney, November 2004Google Scholar
Gupta, Jyotsna, ‘Exploring appropriation of “surplus” ova and embryos in Indian IVF clinics’ (2011) 30(2) New Genetics and Society 167–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gupta, Jyotsna and Richters, Annemiek, ‘Embodied subjects and fragmented objects: women's bodies, assisted reproduction technologies and the right to self-determination’ (2008) 5 Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 239–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gurmankin, Andrea D., ‘Risk information provided to prospective oocyte donors in a preliminary phone call’ (2001) 1(4) American Journal of Bioethics 3–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Juergen, Between Facts and Norms: A Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, trans. Rehg, William (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddow, Gill, Laurie, Graeme, Cunningham-Burley, Sarah and Hunter, Kathryn, ‘Tackling community concerns about commercialisation and genetic research’ (2007) 64 Social Science and Medicine 272–82CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haddow, Gill, Cunningham-Burley, Sarah and Murray, Lorraine, ‘Can the governance of a population genetic databank affect recruitment? Evidence from the public consultation of Generation Scotland’ (2011) 20 Public Understanding of Science 117–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haley, Rebecca, Horvath, Liana and Sugarman, Jeremy, ‘Ethical issues in cord blood banking: summary of a workshop’ (1997) 38 Transfusion 367–73Google Scholar
Hanson, Mark M., ‘Religious voices in biotechnology: the case of gene patenting’ (1997) 27 Hastings Center Report 1–30CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haraway, Donna J., Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature (New York: Routledge, 1991)Google Scholar
Haraway, Donna J., ‘Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective’ (1988) 14(3) Feminist Studies 575–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardin, Garrett, ‘The tragedy of the commons’ (1968) 162 Science 1243–48CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harding, Sandra, ‘Is gender a variable in conceptions of rationality? A survey of issues’, in Gould, Carol C. (ed.), Beyond Domination: New Perspectives on Feminism and Philosophy (Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Allanheld, 1984), pp. 43–63Google Scholar
Harmon, S. H. E. and Laurie, Graeme, ‘Yearworth v. North Bristol NHS Trust: property, principles and paradigms’ (2010) 69 Cambridge Law Journal 476–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, A., Wyatt, S. and Kelly, S., ‘The gift of spit (and the obligation to return it): how consumers of online genetic testing services participate in research’ (2012) 16 Information, Communication and Society 236–57Google Scholar
Harris, John, Wonderwoman and Superman: The Ethics of Human Biotechnology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992)Google Scholar
Harrison, Charlotte H., ‘Neither Moore nor the market’ (2002) 28 American Journal of Law and Medicine 77–104CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Healy, Kieran, Last Best Gifts: Altruism and the Market for Human Blood and Organs (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F., Philosophy of Right, trans. Knox, T. M. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1967)Google Scholar
Heller, Michael A., ‘The tragedy of the anticommons: property in the transition from Marx to markets’ (1998) 111 Harvard Law Review 621–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heller, M. and Eisenberg, R., ‘Can patents deter biomedical research?’ (1998) 280 Science 698–701CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henare, M., ‘Tikanga hau: the spirit of the gift’ (2007), presentation at Philanthropy New Zealand Seminar, Auckland, New Zealand, 28 March, www.philanthropy.org.nz/files/Manuka&20Henare.ppt, accessed 1 June 2016Google Scholar
Herring, Jonathan, ‘Why we need a statute regime to regulate bodily material,’ in Goold, Imogen, Greasley, Kate, Herring, Jonathan and Skene, Loane (eds), Persons, Parts and Property: How Should We Regulate Human Tissue in the 21st Century? (Oxford: Hart, 2014), pp. 215–30Google Scholar
Hiatt, Howard, ‘Protecting the medical commons: who is responsible?’ (1975) 293 New England Journal of Medicine 235–41CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hohfeld, Wesley Newcomb, Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1919)Google Scholar
Holland, Suzanne, ‘Contested commodities at both ends of life: buying and selling embryos, gametes and body tissues’ (2001) 11 Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 263–84CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Honoré, A. M., ‘Ownership’, in Making Law Bind: Essays Legal and Philosophical (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987), pp. 161–92Google Scholar
Horsey, Kirstey, et al., Surrogacy in the UK: Myth Busting and Reform (2015) Report of the UK Working Group on Surrogacy and Law Reform, www.kent.ac.uk/law/research/projects/current/surrogacy/Surrogacy&20in&20the&20UK&20Report&20FINAL.pdf, accessed 1 May 2016Google Scholar
Hottois, Gilbert, Essais philosophie bioéthique et biopolitique (Paris: Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin, 1999)Google Scholar
Howard, Heidi C., Sterckx, Sigrid, Cockbain, Julian et al., ‘The convergence of direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies and biobanking activity: the example of 23andMe,’ in Weinroth, Matthias and Rodrigues, Eugenia (eds), Knowing New Biotechnology: Social Aspects of Technological Convergence (London, Routledge, 2015), pp. 59–75Google Scholar
Hudson, M., Milne, M., Reynolds, P. et al., Te Ara Tika: Guidelines for Maori Research Ethics (Auckland, New Zealand, Health Research Council of New Zealand, 2010)Google Scholar
Hudson, Maui, Russell, Khyla, Uerata, Lynley et al., ‘Te Mata Ira – faces of the gene: developing a cultural foundation for biobanking and genomic research involving Maori’ (2016) 12(4) AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples 341–55.Google Scholar
HUGO (Human Genome Organization), Summary of Principles Agreed at the International Strategy Meeting on Human Genome Sequencing (Bermuda Statement) (London: Wellcome Trust, 1996)Google Scholar
Huijer, Marli and Horstman, Klasien, Factor XX: Vrouwen, Eicellen en Genen [Factor XX: Women, Egg Cells and Genes] (Amsterdam: Boom, 2004).Google Scholar
Fertilisation, Human and Authority, Embryology (HFEA), ‘HFEA publishes report on third scientific review into the safety and efficacy of mitochondrial replacement techniques’ (2014) www.hfea.gov.uk/8964.html, accessed 15 July 2015Google Scholar
Humbyrd, Casey, ‘Fair trade international surrogacy’ (2009) 9 Developing World Bioethics 111–19CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hutchon, David, ‘Commercial cord blood banking – immediate clamping is not safe’ (2006) 333 British Medical Journal 919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ikemoto, Lisa, ‘Eggs as capital: human egg procurement in the fertility industry and the stem cell research enterprise’ (2009) 34 Signs 763–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingram, Tup, ‘Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc.: the product of nature doctrine revisited’ (2014) 29 Berkeley Technology Law Journal 385Google Scholar
Ipsos-MORI, The One-Way Mirror: Public Attitudes to Commercial Access to Health Data (London: Wellcome Trust, 2016)Google Scholar
Jackson, Emily, ‘Fraudulent stem cell research and respect for the embryo’ (2006) 1 Biosciences 349–56Google Scholar
Jacobs, Allen, Dwyer, James and Lee, Peter, ‘Seventy ova’ (2001) 31 Hastings Center Report 12–14CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jaggar, Alison, Feminist Politics and Human Nature (Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Allanheld, 1983)Google Scholar
Jensen, K. and Murray, F., ‘International patenting: the landscape of the human genome’ (2005) 310 Science 239–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Sandra H., ‘A buyer's market: fixing the price for human ova for assisted reproduction’ (2015) 45 Hastings Center Report 9–10CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnston, Carolyn, and Kaye, Jane, ‘Does the UK Biobank have a legal obligation to feedback individual findings to participants?’ (2004) 12 Medical Law Review 239–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joly, Yann, ‘Open source approaches to biotechnology: utopia revisited’ (2007) 59(2) Maine Law Review 386Google Scholar
Jones, David Albert, ‘The other woman: evaluating the language of “three parent” embryos’ (2015) 10 Clinical Ethics 97–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaimal, Anjali, Smith, Catherine, Laros, Russell K., Jr. et al., ‘Cost-effectiveness of private umbilical cord blood banking’ (2009) 114(4) Obstetrics and Gynecology 848–55CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaiser, Jocelyn, ‘Court decides tissue samples belong to university, not patients’ (2006) 312 Science 436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kattel, Rainer and Riivo, Anton, ‘The Estonian genome project and economic development’ (2004) 8(1–2) Trames: Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 106–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaye, Jane, Helgason, Hordur Helgi, Nomper, Ants et al., ‘Population genetic databases: a comparative analysis of the law in Iceland, Sweden, Estonia and the UK’ (2004) 8(1–2) Trames: Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 15–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaye, Jane, Whitley, Edgar A., Kanellopoulou, Nadja et al., ‘Dynamic consent: a solution to a perennial problem?’ (2011) 343 British Medical Journal 1756–833Google Scholar
Kaye, Jane, Whitley, E. A., Lund, D. et al., ‘Dynamic consent: a patient interface for 21st-century research networks?’ (2014) 23 European Journal of Human Genetics 141–46Google Scholar
Kesselheim, A. S. and Mello, M. M., ‘Gene patenting – is the pendulum swinging back?’ (2010) 362 New England Journal of Medicine 1855–58CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kesselheim, Aaron S., Cook-Deegan, Robert M., Winickoff, David E. et al., ‘Gene patenting – the Supreme Court finally speaks’ (2013) 369 New England Journal of Medicine 869–75CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knalo, A., et al., ‘Individual differences in allocations of funds in the dictator game associated with length of the arginine vasopressin1a receptor R53 promoter region and correlation between R53 length and hippocampal mRNA’ (2008) 7 Genes, Brain and Behaviour 266–75Google Scholar
Knoppers, Bartha M., ‘DNA banking: a retrospective perspective’ in Burley, J. and Harris, J. (eds), A Companion to Genethics (Oxford: Blackwell, 2002), pp. 379–86Google Scholar
Knoppers, Bartha M., ‘Biobanking: international norms’ (2005) 33 Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 7–14CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knoppers, Bartha M., Hirtle, Marie and Lormeau, Sébastien, ‘Ethical issues in international collaborative research on the human genome: the HGP and the HGDP’ (1996) 34 Genomics 272–82CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knoppers, Bartha M., Hirtle, Marie and Glass, K. C., ‘Commercialization of genetic research and public policy’ (1999) 286(5448) Science 2277–78CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knoppers, Bartha M., Deschênes, Mylene, Ma'n, H. Zawati and Tassé, Anne Marie, ‘Population studies: Return of research results and incidental findings, Policy Statement’ (2013) 21(3) European Journal of Human Genetics 245–47CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koegler, Gesine, Sensken, Sandra, Airey, Judith A. et al., ‘A new human somatic stem cell from placental cord blood with intrinsic pluripotent differentiation potential’ (2004) 200(2) Journal of Experimental Medicine 123–35Google Scholar
Korts, Kuliki, Weldon, Sue and Gudmansdottir, Margaret Lilja, ‘Genetic databases and public attitudes: a comparison of Iceland, Estonia and the UK’ (2004) 8(1–2) Trames: Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 131–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kramer, W., Schneider, J. and Schultz, N., ‘US oocyte donors: a retrospective study of medical and psychosocial issues’ (2009) 24(12) Human Reproduction 3144–49CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lafontaine, Céline, Le corps-marché: La marchandisation de la vie humaine a l’ère de la bioéconomie (Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 2014)Google Scholar
Laughlin, M. J., Eapen, M., Rubinstein, P. et al., ‘Outcomes after transplantation of cord blood or bone marrow from unrelated donors in adults with leukaemia’ (2004) 351 New England Journal of Medicine 2265–75CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laurie, Graeme, (Intellectual) Property: Let's Think about Staking a Claim to Our Own Genetic Samples (Edinburgh: Arts and Humanities Board Research Centre, 2004)Google Scholar
Lee, J., ‘The fertile imagination of the common law: Yearworth v. North Bristol NHS Trust’ (2009) 17 Torts Law Journal 130Google Scholar
Leigh, Bertie, Umbilical Cord Blood Stem Cell Banking: Legal Review (London: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Umbilical Cell Cord Banking Committee, 2005)Google Scholar
Lessing, Lawrence, The Future of Ideas: The Fate of the Commons in a Connected World (New York: Random House, 2001)Google Scholar
Levine, Aaron D., ‘Self-regulation, compensation, and the ethical recruitment of oocyte donors’ (2010) 40(2) Hastings Center Report 25–36CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levitt, Mairi, ‘Forensic databases: benefits and ethical and social costs’ (2007) 83 British Medical Bulletin 235–48CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levitt, Mairi and Weldon, Sue, ‘A well placed trust? Public perceptions of the governance of DNA databases’ (2005) 15(4) Critical Public Health 311–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, Celine, Clotworthy, Margaret, Hilton, Shona et al., ‘Consent for the use of human biological samples for biomedical research: a mixed media study exploring the British public's preferences,’ (2013) 3 BMJ Open e003022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liddell, Kathleen and Wallace, Susan, ‘Emerging regulatory issues for stem cell medicine’ (2005) 1(1) Genomics, Society and Policy 54–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindemann Nelson, H. and Lindemann Nelson, J., The Patient in the Family (London: Routledge, 1995)Google Scholar
Linebaugh, Peter, ‘Enclosures from the bottom up’ (2010) 108 Radical History Review 11–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lock, Margaret, Twice Dead: Organ Transplants and the Reinvention of Death (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002)Google Scholar
Locke, John, The Second Treatise on Civil Government (1689), in Penniman, Howard R. (ed.), John Locke: On Politics and Education (New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1947)Google Scholar
Lorentzen, H. and Paterson, F., ‘Le don des vivants: l'altruisme des Norvégiens et des Français?’ in Elster, J. and Herpin, N. (eds), Éthique des choix médicaux (Arles: Actes Sud, 1992), pp. 121–38Google Scholar
Lyons, Barry, ‘“The good that is interred in their bones”: are there property rights in the child?’ (2011) 19 Medical Law Review 372–400CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacPherson, C. B., The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism: Hobbes to Locke (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962)Google Scholar
Magnus, David, ‘Issues in oocyte donation for stem cell research’ (2006) 308 Science 1747–48Google Scholar
Mahoney, Joan, ‘An essay on surrogacy and feminist thought’ in Gostin, Larry (ed.), Surrogate Motherhood: Politics and Privacy (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990), pp. 183–97Google Scholar
Maio, Giovanni, ‘The cultural specificity of research ethics – or why ethical debate in France is different’ (2002) 28 Journal of Medical Ethics 147–50CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Malone, T., Catalano, P. J., O'Dwyer, P. J. and Giantonio, B., ‘High rate of consent to bank biologic samples for future research: the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group experience’ (2002) 94 Journal of the National Cancer Institute 769–71CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Manson, Neil C., ‘How not to think about genetic information’ (2005) 35 Hastings Center Report 3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Markens, Susan, Surrogate Motherhood and the Politics of Reproduction (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2010)Google Scholar
Marx, Karl, Capital, trans. Samuel Moore and Edward Aveling, ed. Engels, Frederick (Moscow: Progress, 1954, original edn 1867)Google Scholar
Marx, Karl, Early Writings, trans. and ed. Bottomore, T. B. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963)Google Scholar
Marx, Karl, Grundrisse: Foundations of the Critique of Political Economy, trans. Nicolas, Martin (New York: Vintage Books, 1973)Google Scholar
Marzano-Parisoli, Maria M., Penser le corps (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, Ken and Laurie, Graeme, ‘Consent or property? Dealing with the body and its parts in the shadow of Bristol and Alder Hey’ (2001) 9 Medical Law Review 710–29Google ScholarPubMed
Mason, Ken and Laurie, Graeme, Law and Medical Ethics (8th edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011)Google Scholar
Mauss, Marcel, The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies (2nd edn, London: Routledge, 1990)Google Scholar
McCarraher, Eugene, ‘We have never been disenchanted’ (2015) 17 The Hedgehog Review 86–100Google Scholar
McGovern, Ann, ‘Sharing our body and blood: organ donation and feminist critiques of sacrifice’ (2003) 28(1) Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 89–114Google Scholar
McHale, Jean, ‘Waste, ownership and bodily products’ (2000) 8(2) Health Care Analysis 123–35CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McKean, Margaret A., ‘Success on the commons: a comparative examination of institutions for common resource property management’ (1992) 4 Journal of Theoretical Politics 247–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKenna, David and Sheth, Jayesh, ‘Umbilical cord blood: current status and promise for the future’ (2011) 134 Indian Journal of Medical Research 261–69Google ScholarPubMed
MacKenzie, Catriona, ‘Conceptions of the body and conceptions of autonomy in bioethics’, in Scully, J. L., Baldwin-Ragaven, L. and Fitzpatrick, P. (eds) Feminist Bioethics: At the Center, on the Margins (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2010), pp. 71–90Google Scholar
McLeod, Carolyn, ‘Means and partial means: the full range of the objectification of women’ (2003) 28 Canadian Journal of Philosophy 219–44Google Scholar
McLeod, Carolyn and Baylis, Francoise, ‘For dignity or money: feminists on the commodification of women's reproductive labour,’ in Steinbock, Bonnie (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Bioethics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), pp. 258–83Google Scholar
McLeod, Carolyn and Baylis, Francoise, ‘Feminists on the inalienability of human embryos’ (2006) 21(1) Hypatia 1–14CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mead, H. M., Tikanga Maori: Living by Maori Values (Wellington, New Zealand: Huia, 2003)Google Scholar
Mead, H. M., Whakapapa and the Human Gene (Wellington, New Zealand: Toi Te Taiao/The Bioethics Council of New Zealand, 2004)Google Scholar
Medical Research Council, Public Perceptions of the Collection of Human Biological Samples (London: MRC, 2000)Google Scholar
Medical Research Council, Human Tissue and Biological Samples for Use in Research: Operational and Ethical Guidelines (London: MRC, 2001)Google Scholar
Meilaender, Gilbert, ‘The point of a ban, or, how to think about stem cell research’ (2001) 31 Hastings Center Report 9–15CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mello, Michelle M. and Wolf, Leslie E., ‘The Havasupai case – lessons for research involving stored tissue samples’ (2010) 363 New England Journal of Medicine 204–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Memmi, Dominique, Les gardiens du corps: dix ans de magistère bioéthique (Paris: Editions de l’École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, 1996)Google Scholar
Merle, Jean-Christophe, ‘A Kantian argument for a duty to donate one's own organs: a reply to Nicole Gerrand’ (2000) 17(1) Journal of Applied Philosophy 93–101CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice, The Visible and the Invisible (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 1968)Google Scholar
Ministère Délégué à la Recherche (France), Communiqué de Presse, ‘Cellules souches embryonnaires: présentation du décret autorisant l'importation’, 19 October 2004, www.recherche.gouv.fr/discours/2004/decretembryon.htmGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, Robert, ‘Registered genes, patents and bio-circulation’ (2003) paper presented at the BIOS ‘Vital Politics’ conference, London School of Economics, SeptemberGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, Robert and Waldby, Catherine, ‘National biobanks: clinical labor, risk production, and the creation of biovalue’ (2010) 35 Science, Technology and Human Values 330–55CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moazam, Farhat, Zaman, Riffat Moazam and Jafarey, Aamir M., ‘Conversations with kidney vendors in Pakistan: an ethnographic study’ (2009) 39 Hastings Center Report 29–44CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Montgomery, Jonathan, Health Care Law (1st edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997)Google Scholar
Moore, Henrietta L., A Passion for Difference: Essays in Anthropology and Gender (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1994)Google Scholar
Morrison, Michael, Dickenson, Donna and Lee, Sandra Soo-Jin, ‘Translation in healthcare: ethical, legal and social implications’ (2016) BMC Medical Ethics, www.biomedcentral.com/collections/translationelsi, accessed 1 August 2016Google Scholar
Muir, Rebecca, Diot, Alan and Poulton, Joanna, ‘Mitochondrial content is central to nuclear gene expression: profound implications for human health’ (2015) 38 Bioessays 150–56Google Scholar
Munzer, Stephen R., A Theory of Property (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munzer, Stephen R., ‘An uneasy case against property rights in human body parts’ (1994) 11(2) Social Philosophy and Policy 259–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munzer, Stephen R., ‘The special case of property rights in umbilical cord blood for transplantation’ (1999) 51 Rutgers Law Review 493–568Google ScholarPubMed
Munzer, Stephen R., (ed.), New Essays in the Legal and Political Theory of Property (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002)Google Scholar
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, Quality Statement 6: Delayed Cord Clamping (2015) www.nice.org.uk/guidance/qs105/chapter/quality-statement-6-delayed-cord-clampingGoogle Scholar
Nedelsky, Jennifer, ‘Property in potential life – a relational approach to choosing legal categories’ (1993) 6 Canadian Journal of Legal Jurisprudence 343–58Google Scholar
Nelkin, Dorothy, Dangerous Diagnostics: The Social Power of Biological Information (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994)Google Scholar
Nelkin, Dorothy, ‘Is bioethics for sale?’ (2003) 24(2) Tocqueville Review 45–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelkin, Dorothy and Lindee, Susan, The DNA Mystique: The Gene as a Cultural Icon (New York: W. H. Freeman, 1995)Google Scholar
Nilstun, Tore and Hermeren, Goran, ‘Human tissue samples and ethics – attitudes of the general public in Sweden to biobank research’ (2006) 9 Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 81–86CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Novaes, Simone Bateman, Les passeurs de gamètes (Nancy, France: Presses Universitaires de Nancy, 1994)Google Scholar
Nuffield Council on Bioethics, Stem Cell Therapy: The Ethical Issues, a Discussion Paper (London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 2000)Google Scholar
Nuffield Council on Bioethics, The Ethics of Patenting DNA (London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 2002)Google Scholar
Nussbaum, Martha, ‘Objectification’ (1995) 24(4) Philosophy and Public Affairs 249–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Offe, Claus, ‘Whose good is the common good?’ (2012) 38 Philosophy and Social Criticism 665–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okoth-Ogendo, H. W. O., ‘The tragic African commons: a century of exploration, suppression and submersion’ (2003) 1 University of Nairobi Law Journal 107–17Google Scholar
Oldham, Paul, ‘The patenting of plant and animal genomes’, paper presented at the seventh workshop of the EC PropEur project, Paris, May 2006Google Scholar
Oliveiro, P., ‘La communication sociale des matériaux biologiques: sang, sperme, organs, cadavres’ (1993) 18 Cahiers internationaux de psychologie sociale 21–51Google Scholar
Ossorio, Pilar, ‘Common heritage arguments against patenting DNA’ in Chapman, A. (ed.), Perspectives on Gene Patenting: Religion, Science and Industry in Dialogue (Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1999), pp. 89–108Google Scholar
Ossorio, Pilar, ‘Legal and ethical issues in biotechnology patenting’ in Burley, J. and Harris, J., A Companion to Genethics (Oxford: Blackwell, 2002), pp. 408–19Google Scholar
Ostrom, Elinor, Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otten, J., Wyle, H. and Phelps, G., ‘The charitable trust as a model for genomic banks’ (2004) 350 New England Journal of Medicine 85–86Google Scholar
Palsson, Gisli and Rabinow, Paul, ‘Iceland: the case of a national Human Genome Project’ (1999) 15(3) Anthropology Today 14–18CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pande, Amrit, ‘Commercial surrogacy in India: manufacturing a perfect mother-worker’ (2010) 35 Signs 965–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pande, Amrit, Wombs in Labor: Transnational Commercial Surrogacy in India (New York: Columbia University Press, 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parry, Bronwyn, ‘The new Human Tissue Bill: categorization and definitional issues and their implications’ (2005) 1(1) Genomics, Society and Policy 74–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parry, Bronwyn, ‘Narratives of neoliberalism: “clinical labour” in context’ (2015) 41 Medical Humanities 32–37CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parry, Bronwyn and Gere, Cathy, ‘Contested bodies: the commodification of human biological artefacts’ (2006) 15 Science as Culture 139–58CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parsons, J., Lukyanenko, R. and Wiersma, Y., ‘Easier citizen science is better’ (2011) 471 Nature 37CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pateman, Carole, ‘The fraternal social contract’ in The Disorder of Women (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1989), pp. 33–57Google Scholar
Pateman, Carole, ‘Self-ownership and property in the person: democratization and a tale of two concepts’ (2002) 10 Journal of Political Philosophy 20–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pateman, Carole, and Mills, Charles, Contract and Domination (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2007)Google Scholar
Patrick, M., Smith, A. L., Meyer, W. R. and Bashford, A., ‘Anonymous oocyte donation: a follow-up questionnaire’ (2001) 75 Fertility and Sterility 1034–36Google Scholar
Pearlman, Jonathan, ‘Thailand bans surrogate babies from leaving after Baby Gammy controversy’ (2014) The Telegraph, 15 AugustGoogle Scholar
Pennings, Guido, de Mouzon, J., Shenfield, Francoise et al., ‘Socio-demographic and fertility-related characteristics and motivations of oocyte donors in eleven European countries’ (2014) 29 Human Reproduction deu048CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, Anne, ‘It's my body and I'll do what I like with it: bodies as objects’ (2011) 39(6) Political Theory 724–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posey, D., and Dutfield, G., Beyond Intellectual Property: Towards Traditional Resource Rights for Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (Ottawa: International Development Research Centre, 1996)Google Scholar
Po-Wah, Julia Tao-Li, ‘Right-making and wrong-making in surrogate motherhood; a Confucian feminist perspective,’ in Tong, Rosemarie, Donchin, Anne and Dodds, Susan (eds), Linking Visions: Feminist Bioethics, Human Rights and the Developing World (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2004), pp. 183–202Google Scholar
Prainsack, Barbara, ‘How to avoid selling out: public attitudes to commercial access to health data’ (2016), Bionews, 26 AprilGoogle Scholar
Prasad, V. K., Mendizabal, A., Parikh, S. H. et al., ‘Unrelated donor umbilical cord blood transplantation in inherited metabolic disorders in 159 patients from a single center’ (2008) 112 Blood 2979–89CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prendiville, W. J. and Elbourne, D., ‘Care during the third stage of labour’ in Chalmers, I., Enkin, M. and Keirse, M. J. N. C. (eds), Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), pp. 1145–69Google Scholar
Prendiville, W. J., Elbourne, D. and McDonald, S., ‘Active versus expectant management in the third stage of labour’ (2000) 3 Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, art. no. CD000007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prescott, S. L. and Clifton, V., ‘Asthma and pregnancy: emerging evidence of epigenetic interactions in utero’ (2009) 9(5) Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical Immunology 417–26CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Proctor, S. J., Dickinson, A. M., Parekh, T. and Chapman, C., ‘Umbilical cord blood banks in the UK have proved their worth and now deserve a firmer foundation’ (2001) 323 British Medical Journal 60–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purdy, Laura, Reproducing Persons (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quigley, Muireann, ‘Property: the future of human tissue?’ (2009) 17 Medical Law Review 457–66CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rabinow, Paul, French DNA: Trouble in Purgatory (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radin, Margaret J., Contested Commodities: The Trouble with Trade in Sex, Children, Body Parts and Other Things (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996)Google Scholar
Ragone, Helena, Surrogate Motherhood: Conception in the Heart (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1996)Google Scholar
Rajan, Kaushik Sunder, Biocapital: The Constitution of Postgenomic Life (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramesh, Randeep, ‘NHS patient data to be made available to drug and insurance firms’ (2014) 19 January, www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/19/nhs-patient-data-available-companies-buy, accessed 2 August 2016Google Scholar
Reigstad, M. M., Larsen, J. K., Myklebuss, T. A. et al., ‘Cancer risk among parous women following assisted reproductive technology’ (2015) 30(8) Human Reproduction 1952–63CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Resnik, David B., ‘The commodification of human reproductive materials’ (1998) 24 Journal of Medical Ethics 288–93CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Resnik, David B., ‘Regulating the market for human eggs’ (2001) 15(1) Bioethics 1–26CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Resnik, David B., ‘The commercialization of human stem cells: ethical and policy issues’ (2002) 10 Health Care Analysis 127–54CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Commission, Retained Organs, A Consultation Document on Unclaimed and Unidentifiable Organs and Tissue: A Possible Regulatory Framework (London: National Health Service, 2002)Google Scholar
Riben, Mirah, ‘American surrogate death: NOT the first’ (2015) Huffpost Blog, 15 OctoberGoogle Scholar
Ricœur, Paul, Oneself as Another, trans. Blamey, Kathleen (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992)Google Scholar
Ricœur, Paul, Réflexion faite: autobiographie intellectuelle (Paris: Editions Esprit, 1995)Google Scholar
Rocha, Vanderson, Wagner, John E., Jr., Sobocinski, Kathleen E. et al., ‘Graft-versus-host disease in children who have received a cordblood or bone marrow transplant from an HLA-identical sibling’ (2000) 342(25) New England Journal of Medicine 1846–54CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rocha, Vanderson, Labopin, M., Sans, G. et al., ‘Transplants of umbilical cord blood or bone marrow from unrelated donors in adults with leukaemia’ (2004) 351 New England Journal of Medicine 2276–85CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rogers, Ian and Casper, Robert F., ‘Lifeline in an ethical quagmire: umbilical cord blood as an alternative to embryonic stem cells’ (2004) 2(2) Sexuality, Reproduction and Menopause 64–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, Carol M., ‘The comedy of the commons: customs, commerce and inherently public property’ (1986) 53(3) University of Chicago Law Review 711–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, Carol M., Property and Persuasion: Essays on the History, Theory and Rhetoric of Ownership (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994)Google Scholar
Rose, Hilary, ‘Gendered genetics in Iceland’ (2001) 20(2) New Genetics and Society 119–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, Hilary, ‘An ethical dilemma: the rise and fall of UmanGenomics – the model biotech company?’ (2004) 425 Nature 123–24Google Scholar
Rothstein, Mark A., ‘Expanding the ethical analysis of biobanks’ (2005) 33(1) Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 89–101CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG), Scientific Advisory Committee Opinion Paper No. 2: Cord Blood Banking (London: RCOG, 2001)Google Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG), Umbilical Cord Blood Banking: Scientific Advisory Committee Paper No. 2 (London: RCOG, 2006)Google Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG), Clamping of the Umbilical Cord and Placental Infusion: Scientific Impact Paper No. 14 (London: RCOG, 2015)Google Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) and Royal College of Midwives (RCM), RCOG/RCM Statement on Umbilical Cord Blood Collection and Banking (London: RCOG/RCM, 2011)Google Scholar
Rubinstein, P., Rosenfeld, R. E., Adamson, J. W. and Stevens, C. E., ‘Stored placental blood for unrelated bone marrow reconstitution’ (1993) 81 Blood 1679–90CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ryan, Alan, ‘Exploitation’, in Miller, David, Coleman, Janet, Connolly, William and Alan, Ryan (eds), The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Political Thought (Oxford: Blackwell, 1987), pp. 143–44Google Scholar
Ryan, Alan, ‘Self-ownership, autonomy and property rights’ (1994) 11 Social Philosophy and Policy 241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salter, Brian, ‘Patenting, morality and human embryonic stem cell science: bioethics and cultural politics in Europe’ (2007) 2 Regenerative Medicine 301–11CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sample, Ruth, Exploitation: What It Is and Why It's Wrong (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2003)Google Scholar
Saravanan, Sheela, ‘“Humanitarian” thresholds of the fundamental feminist ideologies: evidence from surrogacy arrangements in India’ (2016) 6(20) Analize: Journal of Gender and Feminist Studies 66–88Google Scholar
Satz, Debra, Why Some Things Should Not Be for Sale (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sautier, René, ‘Économie et éthique à propos d'un intervenant incommode mais inéluctable dans le domaine des sciences de la vie et de la santé, ou comment l’économie doit être pris en compte dans les avis du CCNE,’ in Sicard, Didier (ed.), Vingt ans de travaux du CCNE (Paris: CCNE, 2002), pp. 732–36Google Scholar
Scheper-Hughes, Nancy, ‘Commodity fetishism in organs trafficking’ (2001) 7 Body and Society 31–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheper-Hughes, Nancy, ‘Bodies for sale – whole or in parts’ (2002) 7 Body and Society 1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Ingrid and Schumann, Claudia, ‘Stem cells, therapeutic cloning, embryo research–women as raw material suppliers for science and industry’, in Hermann, Svea Luise and Kurmann, Margaretha (eds), Reproductive Medicine and Genetic Engineering: Women between Self-Determination and Societal Standardisation (Berlin: ReproKult Frauen Forum Fortpflanzungsmedizin, 2001), pp. 70–79Google Scholar
Schneider, J., ‘Fatal colon cancer in a young egg donor: a physician mother's call for follow-up and research on the long-term risks of ovarian stimulation’ (2008) 90(5) Fertility and Sterility 2016e-2016e5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schroeder, J. L., ‘Chix nix bundle-o-stix: a feminist critique of the disaggregation of property’ (1994) 83 Michigan Law Review 239–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz, Susanne and Braun, Kathrine, ‘Procuring tissue: regenerative medicine, oocyte mobilisation and feminist politics,’ in Webster, Andrew (ed.), The Global Dynamics of Regenerative Medicine: A Social Science Critique (New York: Springer, 2013), pp. 118–49Google Scholar
Scott, Elizabeth S., ‘Surrogacy and the politics of commodification’ (2009) 72 Law and Contemporary Problems 109–46Google Scholar
Scully, Jackie Leach, ‘Normative ethics and non-normative embodiment’ (2004) paper presented at the Feminist Approaches to Bioethics conference, Sydney, NovemberGoogle Scholar
Senituli, Lopeti, ‘They came for sandalwood, now the b…s are after our genes!’ (2004) paper presented at the conference ‘Research ethics, tikanga Maori/indigenous and protocols for working with communities’, Wellington, New Zealand, 10–12 JuneGoogle Scholar
Shiffrin, Seana Valentine, ‘Lockean arguments for private intellectual property’, in Stephen, R. Munzer (ed.), New Essays in the Legal and Political Theory of Property (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), pp. 138–67Google Scholar
Shiva, Vandana, Biopiracy: The Plunder of Nature and Knowledge (Boston: South End Press, 1997)Google Scholar
Sigurdsson, Skuli, ‘Yin-yang genetics, or the HSD deCODE controversy’ (2001) 20(2) New Genetics and Society 103–17CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sistare, Christine T., ‘Reproductive freedom and women's freedom: surrogacy and autonomy’, in Jaggar, Alison M. (ed.), Living with Contradictions: Controversies in Feminist Social Ethics (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994), pp. 395–401Google Scholar
Skene, Loane, ‘Raising issues with a property law approach’, in Goold, Imogen, Greasley, Kate, Herring, Jonathan and Skene, Loane (eds), Persons, Parts and Property: How Should We Regulate Human Tissue in the 21st Century? (Oxford: Hart, 2014), pp. 263–79Google Scholar
Skloot, Rebecca, ‘Taking the least of you: the tissue-industrial complex’ (2006) New York Times, 16 AprilGoogle Scholar
Skolbekken, John-Arne, Ursin, Lars Oystein, Solberg, Berge et al., ‘Not worth the paper it's written on? Informed consent and biobank research in a Norwegian context’ (2005) 15(4) Critical Public Health 335–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sleeboom-Faulkner, Margaret, Global Morality and Life Science Practices in Asia: Assemblages of Life (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spar, Debora, The Baby Business: How Money, Science, and Politics Drive the Commerce of Conception (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006)Google Scholar
Spar, Debora, ‘Free markets, free choice: a market approach to reproductive rights’, in Goodwin, Michele Bratcher (ed.), Baby Markets: Money and the New Politics of Creating Families (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 177–90Google Scholar
Steinbock, Bonnie, ‘Payment for egg donation and surrogacy’ (2004) 71(4) Mt Sinai Journal of Medicine 55–65Google ScholarPubMed
Steinbrook, Robert, ‘Egg donation and human embryonic stem-cell research’ (2006) 354 New England Journal of Medicine 324–26CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sterckx, Sigrid, Biotechnology, Patents and Morality (2nd edn, Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2000)Google Scholar
Sterckx, Sigrid, ‘Embryo stem cell patenting’ (2005) paper presented at the fifth workshop of the EC PropEur project, Bilbao, DecemberGoogle Scholar
Sterckx, Sigrid, Rakic, Vojin, and Cockbain, Julian, ‘“You hoped we would sleepwalk into accepting the collection of our data”: controversies surrounding the UK care.data scheme and their wider relevance for biomedical research’ (2016) 19 Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 177–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, Cameron, Aparicio, Lorena C. and Kerridge, Ian H., ‘Ethical and legal issues raised by cord blood banking – the challenges of the new bioeconomy’ (2013) 199 Medical Journal of Australia 290–92CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stewart, Cameron, Lipworth, Wendy, Aparicio, Lorena et al., ‘The problem of biobanking and the law of gifts’, in Goold, Imogen, Greasley, Kate, Herring, Jonathan and Skene, Loane (eds), Persons, Parts and Property: How Should We Regulate Human Tissue in the 21st Century? (Oxford: Hart, 2014), pp. 25–38Google Scholar
Stock, Gregory, ‘Eggs for sale: how much is too much?’ (2001) 1(4) American Journal of Bioethics 26–27CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stranger, Mark, Chalmers, Donald and Nicol, Dianne, ‘Capital, trust and consultation: databanks and regulation in Australia’ (2005) 15(4) Critical Public Health 349–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugarman, Jeremy, Reisner, Emily G. and Kurtzberg, Joanne, ‘Ethical issues of banking placental blood for transplantation’ (1995) 274 Journal of the American Medical Association 1763–85Google ScholarPubMed
Sullivan, Mark, ‘23andMe has signed 12 other genetic data partnerships beyond Pfizer and Genentech,’ Venturebeat.com, 14 January 2015, http://venturebeat.com/2015/01/14/23andme-has-signed-12-other-genetic-data-partnerships-beyond-pfizer-and-genentech/, accessed 7 June 2016Google Scholar
Sulston, John, ‘Staking claims in the biotechnology Klondike’ (2007) 84 Bulletin of the World Health Organisation 412–13Google Scholar
Sulston, John and Ferry, Georgina, The Common Thread: Science, Politics, Ethics and the Human Genome (London: Corgi, 2003)Google Scholar
Sutcliffe, A. G., Williams, C. L., Jones, M. E. et al., ‘Ovarian tumor risk in women after assisted reproductive therapy (ART); 2.2 million person years of observation in Great Britain’ (2015) 104 (3) Fertility and Sterility e37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tachibana, M., Amato, P., Sparman, M. et al., ‘Towards germline gene therapy of inherited mitochondrial disease’ (2012) 493 Nature 627–31Google Scholar
Taylor, R. W. and Turnbull, D. M., ‘Mitochondrial DNA mutations in human disease’ (2005) 6 Nature Reviews Genetics 389–402CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, Robert S., ‘A Kantian defense of self-ownership’ (2004) 12(1) Journal of Political Philosophy 65–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thambisetty, Sivaramjani, Human Genome Patents and Developing Countries (London: Department for International Development, Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, 2002)Google Scholar
Thorsteindottir, Halla, Daar, Abdalla S., Smith, Richard D. and Singer, Peter A., ‘Commentary: Genomics – a global public good?’ (2003) 363 The Lancet 891–92Google Scholar
Thouvénin, Dominique, ‘Autour du don et de la gratuité’ (2002) Revue générale de droit médical, Numéro spécial: droit santé 99–108Google Scholar
Till, James, Tritcher, David A., Senituli, Lopeti and Boyes, Margaret, ‘Selling genes: constructing a population genetic database on Tonga,’ in Lavery, James V., Grady, Christine, Wahl, Elizabeth R. and Emanuel, Ezekiel (eds), Ethical Issues in International Biomedical Research: A Casebook (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), pp. 43–63Google Scholar
Tipene-Matua, B. and Wakefield, B., ‘Establishing a Maori ethical framework for genetic research with Maori’, in Henaghan, M. (ed.), Genes, Society and the Future (Wellington, New Zealand: Brookers, 2007), vol. III, pp. 379–422Google Scholar
Titmuss, Richard M., The Gift Relationship: From Human Blood to Social Policy, eds Oakley, Ann and Ashton, J. (2nd edn, London: LSE Books, 1997)Google Scholar
Tober, Diane, ‘Semen as gift, semen as goods: reproductive workers and the market in altruism’ (2001) 7 Body and Society 137–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katarina, Trimmings and Beaumont, Paul (eds), International Surrogacy Arrangements: Legal Regulation at the International Level (Oxford: Hart, 2013)Google Scholar
UNESCO Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights (1997), http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13177&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.htmlGoogle Scholar
UK Department of Health (DOH), Human Bodies, Human Choices: The Law on Human Organs and Tissue in England and Wales (London: DOH, 2002)Google Scholar
UK Parliament, House of Commons, Select Committee on Science and Technology Fifth Report (2005)Google Scholar
US National Academies, ‘Report proposes structure for national network of cord blood stem cell banks’ (2005), 18 April, www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/04/050418095036.htm, accessed 14 June 2016Google Scholar
US National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC), Research Involving Human Biological Materials: Ethical Issues and Policy Guidance (Rockville, MD: NBAC, 1999)Google Scholar
US National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, ‘About the GDC’ (2014) https://gdc.nci.nih.gov/about-gdc, accessed 14 June 2016Google Scholar
Van Assche, K., Gutwirth, S. and Sterckx, S., ‘Protecting dignitary interests of biobank research participants: lessons from Havasupai Tribe v. Arizona Board of Regents’ (2013) 5(1) Law, Innovation and Technology 54–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Rheenen, Patrick and Brabin, Bernard J., ‘Late umbilical cord-clamping as an intervention for reducing iron deficiency anaemia in term infants in developing and industrialised countries: a systematic review’ (2004) 24 Annals of Tropical Paediatrics 3–16CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waldby, Catherine, ‘Biomedicine, tissue transfer and intercorporeality’ (2002) 3(3) Feminist Theory 239–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waldby, Catherine and Cooper, Melinda, ‘From reproductive work to regenerative labour: the female body and the stem cell industries’ (2010) 11 Feminist Theory 3–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waldby, Catherine and Cooper, Melinda, ‘The biopolitics of reproduction: post-Fordist biotechnology and women's clinical labour’ (2008) 23 Australian Feminist Studies 57–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waldby, Catherine and Mitchell, Robert, Tissue Economies: Blood, Organs and Cell Lines in Late Capitalism (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2006)Google Scholar
Wall, Jesse, ‘The legal status of body parts: a framework’ (2011) 31(4) Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 783–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wall, Jesse, Being and Owning: The Body, Bodily Material, and the Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, Susan and Stewart, Alison, Cord Blood Banking: Guidelines and Prospects (Cambridge: Genetic Knowledge Park, 2004)Google Scholar
Warren, Mary Anne, ‘The moral significance of the gene’, in Burley, J. and Harris, J. (eds), A Companion to Genethics (Oxford: Blackwell, 2002), pp. 147–57Google Scholar
Weeks, Andrew, ‘Umbilical cord clamping after birth: better not to rush’ (2007) 335 British Medical Journal 312–13CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wellcome Trust and Medical Research Council (MRC), Assessing Public Attitudes to Health Related Findings in Research (London: Wellcome Trust and MRC, 2012)Google Scholar
Wert, Guido de, Meulen, Ruud ter, Mordacci, Roberto and Tallachini, Mariachiara, Ethics and Genetics: A Workbook for Practitioners and Students (Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wertheimer, Alan, Exploitation (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widdows, Heather, ‘The impact of new reproductive technologies on concepts of genetic relatedness and non-relatedness’, in Widdows, Heather, Alkorta Idiakez, Itziar and Emaldi Cirion, Aitziber (eds), Women's Reproductive Rights (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), pp. 151–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widdows, Heather, ‘Persons and their parts: new reproductive technologies and risks of commodification’ (2009) 17 Health Care Analysis 36–46CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Widdows, Heather, ‘Border disputes across bodies: exploitation in trafficking for prostitution and egg sale for stem cell research’ (2009) 2(1) International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 5–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiemels, J. L., Cazzaniga, G., Daniotti, M. et al., ‘Prenatal origin of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia in children’ (1999) 352 Lancet 1499–503Google Scholar
Wilkinson, Stephen, ‘Commodification arguments for the legal prohibition of organ sale’ (2000) 8 Health Care Analysis 189–201CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilkinson, Stephen, Bodies for Sale: Ethics and Exploitation in the New Human Body Trade (London: Routledge, 2003)Google Scholar
Williams, Garrath, ‘Bioethics and large-scale biobanking: individualistic ethics and collective projects’ (2005) 1(2) Genomics, Society and Policy 50–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, H. L., ‘Intellectual property rights and innovation: evidence from the human genome’ (2013) 121 Journal of Political Economy 1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Patricia J., ‘On being the object of property’, in Weisberg, D. Kelly (ed.), Feminist Legal Theory: Foundations (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1992), pp. 594–602Google Scholar
Winickoff, David E., ‘Partnership in UK Biobank: a third way for genomic property?’ (2007) 35 Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 440–56CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winickoff, David E. and Neumann, Larissa B., ‘Towards a social contract for genomics: property and the public in the “biotrust” model’ (2005) 1(3) Genomics, Society and Policy 8–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winickoff, David E. and Winickoff, Richard N., ‘The charitable trust as a model for genomic biobanks’ (2003) 349(12) New England Journal of Medicine 1180–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, Susan M., Crock, Brittney N., Van Ness, Brian et al., ‘Managing incidental findings and research results in genomic research involving biobanks and archived data sets’ (2012) 14 Genetics in Medicine 361–84CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xitaras, Mikhail, La Propriété (Paris: Fondements de la politique, Presses Universitaires de France, 2004)Google Scholar
Yong, Ed, ‘Making indigenous peoples equal partners in gene research’ (2015) The Atlantic, 23 OctoberGoogle Scholar
Zargooshi, J., ‘Quality of life of Iranian kidney donors’ (2001) 166 Journal of Urology 1790–800CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zilberstein, Moshe, Feingold, Michael and Selbel, Michelle M., ‘Umbilical cordblood banking: lessons learned from gamete donation’ (1997) 349 Lancet 642–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar