Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T08:11:48.565Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Regulation of bodily parts: understanding bodily parts as a duplex

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2019

Remigius N. Nwabueze
Remigius N. Nwabueze*
Affiliation:
Associate Professor of Law, School of Law, University of Southampton
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: R.N.Nwabueze@soton.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The current law in England and Wales adopts a no-property approach to cadavers and separated bodily parts; paradoxically, it affords proprietary protection to tissue users at the expense of tissue sources. Non-proprietary frameworks hardly offer effective legal redress to tissue sources. Potentially, the law could offer tissue sources a mix of proprietary and non-proprietary remedies. Drawing from the work of the famous anthropologist, Marilyn Strathern, I argue that such a flexible and eclectic approach might be facilitated by the concept of duplex, an analytical tool that promotes divergent thinking and paradoxical conceptions of a given issue. I argue that while the no-property rule reflects a duplex on bodily parts, the duplex is narrow and ought to be conceptualised more broadly to cover the claims of tissue sources.

Keywords

duplex theorylegal theoryproperty theoryno-property rulebodily partsdead bodiestissue sources
Type
Article
Information
International Journal of Law in Context , Volume 15 , Issue 4 , December 2019 , pp. 515 - 535
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, N (2007) Medical or managerial manslaughter? In Erin, CA and Ost, S (eds), The Criminal Justice System and Health Care. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 49–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashworth, A (1996) Criminal liability in a medical context: the treatment of good intentions. In Simester, AP and Smith, ATH (eds) Harm and Culpability. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 192–213.Google Scholar
Awaya, T (1994) The theory of neo-cannibalism. Japanese Journal of Philosophy 3, 29–47 (quoted in Scheper-Hughes N (2000) The global traffic in human organs. Current Anthropology 41, 191–224).Google Scholar
Ball, JM (1989) The Body Snatchers: Doctors, Grave Robbers and the Law. New York: Dorset Press.Google Scholar
Birks, P (2005) Unjust Enrichment, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, J (2001) Decentring regulation: understanding the role of regulation and self-regulation in a ‘post-regulatory’ world. Current Legal Problems 54, 103–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brazier, M (2002) Retained organs: ethics and humanity. Legal Studies 22, 550–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brazier, M and Allen, N (2007) Criminalizing medical malpractice. In Erin, CA and Ost, S (eds), The Criminal Justice System and Health Care. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 15–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brian, SAW (1984) Cannibalism and the Common Law. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Brownsword, R (2004) The cult of consent: fixation and fallacy. Kings College Law Journal 15, 223–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brownsword, R (2008) Rights, Regulation, and the Technological Revolution. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cantor, NL (2010) After We Die: The Life and Times of the Human Cadaver. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Card, R (2008), Card, Cross and Jones Criminal Law, 18th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, GA (1995) Self-ownership, Freedom, and Equality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, M (2007) Property: Meanings, Histories, Theories. Oxford: Routledge-Cavendish.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, M and Naffine, N (2001) Are Persons Property? Legal Debates about Property and Personality. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
Drimmer, F (1981) The Body Snatchers: Stiffs and Other Ghoulish Delights. New York: Citadel Press.Google Scholar
Edwards, J and Petrović-Šteger, M (2011) On recombinant knowledge and debts that inspire. In Edwards, J and Petrović-Šteger, M (eds), Recasting Anthropological Knowledge: Inspiration and Social Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Einstein, A (1954) Ideas and Opinions. New York: Crown Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
Erin, CA and Ost, S (2007) The Criminal Justice System and Health Care. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farrell, A (2012) The Politics of Blood: Ethics, Innovation and the Regulation of Risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frow, J (1995) Elvis’ fame: the commodity form and the form of the person. Cardozo Studies in Law & Literature 7, 131–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gitter, DM (2004) Ownership of human tissue: a proposal for federal recognition of human research participants’ property rights in their biological material. Washington & Lee Law Review 61, 257–346.Google Scholar
Gold, ER (1996) Body Parts: Property Rights and the Ownership of Human Biological Materials. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Goodwin, M (2006) Black Markets: The Supply and Demand of Body Parts. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon-Grube, K (1988) Anthropophagy in post-Renaissance Europe: the tradition of medicinal cannibalism. American Anthropologist 90, 405–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, K (1991) Property in the thin air. Cambridge Law Journal 50, 252–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greasley, K (2014) Property rights in the human body: commodification and objectification. In Goold, I et al. (eds), Persons, Parts and Property: How Should We Regulate Human Tissue in the 21st Century? Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 67–88.Google Scholar
Handford, P (2001) Psychiatric damage where the defendant is the immediate victim. Law Quarterly Review 117, 397.Google Scholar
Handford, P (2010) Intentional negligence: a contradiction in terms. Sydney Law Review 32, 29–62.Google Scholar
Hardcastle, R (2007) Law and the Human Body: Property Rights, Ownership and Control. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
Harding, L (2003) Victim of cannibal agreed to be eaten, The Guardian, 4 December 2003.Google Scholar
Harris, JW (1996) Who owns my body. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 16, 55–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hegel, GWF (2005) Philosophy of Right. Dyde, SW (trans.). New York: Dover Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Herring, J (2007) Crimes against the dead. In Brooks-Gordon, B et al. (eds), Death Rites and Rights. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 219–240.Google Scholar
Herring, J (2014) Why we need a statute regime to regulate bodily material. In Goold, I et al. (eds), Persons, Parts and Property: How Should We Regulate Human Tissue in the 21st Century? Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 215–230.Google Scholar
Honoré, AM (1961) Ownership. In Guest, AG (ed.), Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 107–147.Google Scholar
House of Commons (1828) Report from the Select Committee on Anatomy. London: The House of Commons.Google Scholar
House of Commons (UK) (2001) The Royal Liverpool Children's Inquiry, Hansard, 30 January 2001.Google Scholar
James, R (1747) Pharmacopoeia Universalis: Or a New Universal English Dispensatory. London: J Hodges.Google Scholar
Jones, DG and Whitaker, MI (2009) Speaking for the Dead: The Human Body in Biology and Medicine, 2nd edn. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Kant, I (1963) Lectures on Ethics. Infield, L (trans.). Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Kant, I (1996) Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. In Gregor, M (ed.), Practical Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Keeton, WP et al. (1988) Prosser and Keeton on Torts, 5th edn. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Kennedy, I (1988) Treat Me Right: Essays In Medical Law and Ethics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Laurie, G (2002) Genetic Privacy: A Challenge to Medico-legal Norms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liddell, K and Hall, A (2005) Beyond Bristol and Alder Hey: the future regulation of human tissue. Medical Law Review 13, 170–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locke, J (1988) Two Treaties of Government. Laslett, P (ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacGillivary, R (1988) Body-snatching in Ontario. Canadian Bulletin of Medical History 5, 51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macpherson, CB (1962) The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism: Hobbes To Locke. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mahoney, JD (2000) The market for human tissue. Virginia Law Review 86, 163–223.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mason, K and Laurie, G (2001) Consent or property? Dealing with the body and its parts in the shadow of Bristol and Alder Hey. Modern Law Review 64, 710–729.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matthews, P (1983) Whose body? People as property. Current Legal Problems 36, 193–239.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McLennan, A and Rimmer, M (2012) Inventing life: intellectual property and the new biology. In Rimmer, M and McLennan, A (eds), Intellectual Property and Emerging Technologies: The New Biology. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Merry, AF (2007) When are errors a crime? Lessons from New Zealand. In Erin, CA and Ost, S (eds), The Criminal Justice System and Health Care. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 67–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, J (2007) Medicalizing crime – criminalising health? The role of law. In Erin, CA and Ost, S (eds), The Criminal Justice System and Health Care. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 257–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munzer, SR (1993) Kant and property rights in body parts. Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence 6, 319–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naffine, N (1999) ‘But a lump of earth?’ The legal status of the corpse. In Manderson, D (ed.), Courting Death: The Law of Mortality. London: Pluto Press, pp. 95–106.Google Scholar
Noble, L (2011) Medicinal Cannibalism in Early Modern English Literature and Culture. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2011) Human Bodies: Donation for Medicine and Research. London: NCB.Google Scholar
Nwabueze, RN (2007) Biotechnology and the Challenge of Property: Property Rights in Dead Bodies, Body Parts and Genetic Information. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Nwabueze, RN (2008) Donated organs, property rights and the remedial quagmire. Medical Law Review 16, 201–224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nwabueze, RN (2014) Cadavers, body parts and the remedial problem. In Goold, I et al. (eds), Persons, Parts and Property: How Should We Regulate Human Tissue in the 21st Century? Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 157–175.Google Scholar
Nwabueze, RN (2016a) Proprietary interests in organs in limbo. Legal Studies 36, 279–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nwabueze, RN (2016b) The liability rule, proprietary remedies and body parts. Liverpool Law Review 37, 177–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ormerod, D and Laird, K (2015) Smith and Hogan's Criminal Law, 14th edn. Oxford; Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ost, S and Erin, CA (2007) An ill-suited and inappropriate union? Exploring the relationship between the criminal justice system and health care. In Erin, CA and Ost, S (eds), The Criminal Justice System and Health Care. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
Peacock, M (1896) Executed criminals and folk-medicine. Folk-Lore 7, 268–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pliny, E (1975) Natural History, Vol. 8, Books 28–32. Jones, WHS (trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Price, D (2003) From Cosmos and Damien to Van Velzen: the human tissue saga continues. Medical Law Review 11, 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, D (2010) Human Tissue in Transplantation and Research: A Model Legal and Ethical Donation Framework. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Putniṋa, A (2011) Invisible families: imagining relations in families based on same-sex partnerships. In Edwards, J and Petrović-Šteger, M (eds), Recasting Anthropological Knowledge: Inspiration and Social Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 108.Google Scholar
Quigley, M (2014) Propertisation and commercialisation: on controlling the uses of human biomaterials. Modern Law Review 77, 677–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rao, R (2000) Property, privacy, and the human body. Boston University Law Review 80, 359–460.Google ScholarPubMed
Richardson, R (1988) Death, Dissection and the Destitute. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Richardson, R (2006) Human dissection and organ donation: a historical and social background. Mortality 11, 151–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riles, A (2011) Too big to fail. In Edwards, J and Petrović-Šteger, M (eds), Recasting Anthropological Knowledge: Inspiration and Social Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 31–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheper-Hughes, N (2002) Bodies for sale: whole or in parts. In Scheper-Hughes, N and Wacquant, L (eds), Commodifying Bodies. London: Sage Publications, pp. 1–4.Google Scholar
Scott, R (1981) The Body As Property. New York: The Viking Press.Google Scholar
Shultz, MM (1985) From informed consent to patient choice: a new protected interest. Yale Law Journal 95, 219–299.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simester, AP et al. (2010) Simester and Sullivan's Criminal Law: Theory and Doctrine, 4th edn. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
Siraisi, N (1990) Medieval and Early Renaissance Medicine. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spencer, JR (2004) Criminal liability for the desecration of a corpse. Archbold News 6, 7–9.Google Scholar
Stoljar, S (1987) Unjust enrichment and unjust sacrifice. Modern Law Review 50, 603–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strathern, M (2005) Kinship, Law and the Unexpected: Relatives Are Always a Surprise. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Fraassen, BC (1980) The Scientific Image. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Virgo, G (2006) The Principles of the Law of Restitution, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waldby, C and Mitchell, R (2006) Tissue Economies: Blood, Organs and Cell Lines in Late Capitalism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, GP (1957) Jurisprudence and the discussion of ownership. Cambridge Law Journal 15, 216–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wootton, AC (1972) Chronicles of Pharmacy, Vol. 2. New York: USV Pharmaceutical Corporation.Google Scholar