Through the Thicket and Across the Divide: Successfully Navigating the Regulatory Landscape in Life Sciences Research

This chapter addresses the considerable problems that arise within and between regulatory regimes when there is a failure to implement intelligent design that is responsive to the realities of life sciences research. We argue that a root cause of these problems is the dichotomization of regulatory regimes as between tissue and data and the creation of a non-nexus between bodies of knowledge and legal responses to technological developments. The result is a regulatory thicket and a net failure to deliver effective, efficient and proportionate regimes. Taking the UK and European context as its example, this chapter argues for a collapse in the distinction between tissue and data and for more fluid and reflexive governance systems that not only embody interdisciplinary intelligent design but are also constructed around legal architectures that are responsive to changing scientific and social mores. This requires less, not more, proscription from law.

[1]  Brian Salter,et al.  State strategies of governance in biomedical innovation: aligning conceptual approaches for understanding 'Rising Powers' in the global context , 2011, Globalization and health.

[2]  Gill Haddow,et al.  Governing Risk, Engaging Publics, and Engendering Trust: New Horizons for Law and Social Science? , 2013 .

[3]  Graeme Laurie,et al.  Towards Principles–Based Approaches to Governance of Health–Related Research Using Personal Data , 2013, European Journal of Risk Regulation.

[4]  Andrew Webster,et al.  Bio-objects and their Boundaries: Governing Matters at the Intersection of Society, Politics, and Science , 2011, Croatian medical journal.

[5]  Jennifer Couzin-Frankel,et al.  Science Gold Mine, Ethical Minefield , 2009, Science.

[6]  S. Harmon,et al.  Solidarity: A (New) Ethic for Global Health Policy , 2006, Health Care Analysis.

[7]  J. Black Decentring Regulation: Understanding the Role of Regulation and Self-Regulation in a ‘Post-Regulatory’ World , 2001 .

[8]  S. Harmon Ambition and Ambivalence: Encouraging a "Sci-Tech Culture" in Argentina through Engagement and Regulatory Reform , 2011 .

[9]  D. Butler Translational research: Crossing the valley of death , 2008, Nature.

[10]  S. Harmon,et al.  Yearworth v. North Bristol NHS trust: a property case of uncertain significance? , 2010, Medicine, health care, and philosophy.

[11]  Bob Wong,et al.  Concerns of newborn blood screening advisory committee members regarding storage and use of residual newborn screening blood spots. , 2011, American journal of public health.

[12]  Alex Faulkner,et al.  Governing biological material at the intersection of care and research: the use of dried blood spots for biobanking , 2012, Croatian medical journal.

[13]  G Laurie Better to hesitate at the threshold of compulsion: PKU testing and the concept of family autonomy in Eire , 2002, Journal of medical ethics.

[14]  D. Beyleveld,et al.  Betrayal of Confidence in the Court of Appeal , 2000, Medical law international.

[15]  Erin Rothwell,et al.  Retention and Research Use of Residual Newborn Screening Bloodspots , 2013, Pediatrics.

[16]  Denise Chrysler,et al.  The Michigan BioTrust for Health: Using Dried Bloodspots for Research to Benefit the Community While Respecting the Individual , 2011, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics.

[17]  Bettina Lange,et al.  Introduction: Material Worlds: Intersections of Law, Science, Technology, and Society , 2012 .

[18]  D. Hougaard,et al.  Storage policies and use of the Danish Newborn Screening Biobank , 2007, Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease.

[19]  Shawn Harmon,et al.  Regulation of Stem Cell and Regenerative Science: Stakeholder Opinions, Plurality and Actor Space in the Argentine Social/Science Setting , 2010 .

[20]  Shawn Harmon,et al.  Foresighting Futures: Law, New Technologies, and the Challenges of Regulating for Uncertainty , 2012 .

[21]  Jeffrey Botkin,et al.  State Laws Regarding the Retention and Use of Residual Newborn Screening Blood Samples , 2011, Pediatrics.

[22]  Graeme Laurie,et al.  RHETORIC OR REALITY: WHAT IS THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE CONSENT FORM IN HEALTH-RELATED RESEARCH?* , 2012, Medical law review.

[23]  Shuyuan Hu Minnesota Supreme Court hears whether the Genetic Privacy Act protects newborn blood spot samples obtained under the state's newborn screening statutes--Bearder v. State of Minnesota. , 2012, American journal of law & medicine.

[24]  Shawn Harmon,et al.  YEARWORTHv. NORTH BRISTOL NHS TRUST: PROPERTY, PRINCIPLES, PRECEDENTS AND PARADIGMS , 2010, The Cambridge Law Journal.