Bioethics

Bioethics
Name
Course
Lecture
Date
The debate on whether we own our body fluids and organs has been an alarming issue that has been contributed by the advancing and modern technology and the continuing progress in medical science. As day`s progresses, there are several cases where it is uncertain as to whom has the assets privileges of body fluids, cells or organs. In such case, the questions on ownership tend to shell in cases where body fluids and organs are no longer located to the person`s body. The stipulation to hand over ownership of bodily essence suggests that we have permanently entered an age that necessitates examination of our understanding of the legal rights and relationships in the human body and the human cell.
According to Charo 1517, he believes that if there is anything in the world that a person own is their body and any element associated with it. But this has been different as the right has become more uncertain when dealing with expunged bodily resources that are often used in laboratory trying. In other cases, Doctors take advantage of the patients and do cell transplant without the patient concept hence violating human rights over ownership and privacy (Hughes, 2002).
The issue on whether we own our own fluids and tissues can be well analyzed in the case between Moore v. and his doctor David. In this case, Moore was requested to contribute to research by the doctor a request that they denied and on the contrary, the doctor went ahead and get Moore`s exceed spleen ware used by Golde and his research colleges to develop a cell line. This action did not gratify Moore and he decided to sue the members of the research, but things did not end up per their wish since biotechnology law overweighed the court and the need to discover new things made it possible for science to be respected.
Although an adult has the right to decide whether to contribute to medical treatment or not, we may say that we own our body parts, and fluid, but what should be done is to enlighten individuals this rights. According to the National Institute of health in the US, argues that patenting and owning human beings as well genetic materials of a human being without their consent it like slavery. In this case, slavery infringes upon the dignity of human beings. The act sates that research in biotechnology should always adhere to the standards of the society and that it should not overcome over the respect for the person`s rights and human self-respect.
Bioethical law differ from one country to the other since US and the European Union`s among other countries accept and support the concept that human genetic material is patentable. This is not acceptable in every country since other countries oppose the patenting of human genetic material. In such cases, the need for legal principles application in courts should be applied as well have some amendments done to the countries that support patenting
Regarding Moore`s case, it illustrates the manner in which patenting human genetic material and bioethics are inextricably combined with medical law. In this case, the impression of law at pertaining to patenting of human hereditary material in dissimilar countries has a pact with various lawful approaches which could be taken into consideration and deal with such a predicament. Though we may fight and assume that we own our body fluids and organs, this may always depend on the law implemented in a given country.
Though one may fight for their rights, we should not have any alienable rights since this can turn the world in...