Stem cell technologies: regulation, patents and problems

Human embryonic stem cell research promises to deliver in the future a whole range of therapeutic treatments, but currently governments in different jurisdictions must try to regulate this burgeoning area. Part of the problem has been, and continues to be, polarised community opinion on the use of human embryonic stem cells for research. This article compares the approaches of the Australian, United Kingdom and United States governments in regulating human embryonic stem cell research. To date, these governments have approached the issue through implementing legislation or policy to control research. Similarly, the three jurisdictions have viewed the patentability of human embryonic stem cell technologies in their own ways with different policies being adopted by the three patent offices. This article examines these different approaches and discusses the inevitable concerns that have been raised due to the lack of a universal approach in relation to the regulation of research; the patenting of stem cell technologies; and the effects patents granted are having on further human embryonic stem cell research.     

Stem cell terminology: practical, theological and ethical implications

Stem cell policy discussions frequently confuse embryonic and fetal sources of stem cells, and label untested, non-reproductive cloning as "therapeutic." Such misnomers distract attention from significant practical and ethical implications: accelerated research agendas tend to be supported at the expense of physical risks to women, theological implications in a multi-faith community, informed consent for participation in research, and treatment decisions altered by unrealistic expectations.     

Families,frontiers and the new imperial history

One of the more recent developments in historiography has been the emergence of 'new imperial history'. The articles within this special edition of the History of the Family offer examples of how some historians have dealt with the histories of both empires and families.     

Race categorization and the regulation of business and science

Despite the lack of consensus regarding the meaning or significance of race or ethnicity amongst scientists and the lay public, there are legal requirements and guidelines that dictate the collection of racial and ethnic data across a range of institutions. Legal regulations are typically created through a political process and then face varying kinds of resistance when the state tries to implement them. We explore the nature of this opposition by comparing responses from businesses, scientists, and science-oriented businesses (pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies) to U.S. state regulations that used politically derived racial categorizations, originally created to pursue civil rights goals. We argue that insights from cultural sociology regarding institutional and cultural boundaries can aid understanding of the nature of resistance to regulation. The Food and Drug Administration's guidelines for research by pharmaceutical companies imposed race categories on science-based businesses, leading to objections that emphasized the autonomy and validity of science. In contrast, similar race categories regulating first business by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and later scientific research sponsored by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) encountered little challenge. We argue that pharmaceutical companies had the motive (profit) that NIH-supported scientists lacked and a legitimate discourse (boundary work of science) that businesses regulated by the EEOC did not have. The study suggests the utility of a comparative cultural sociology of the politics of legal regulation, particularly when understanding race-related regulation and the importance of examining legal regulations for exploring how the meaning of race or ethnicity are contested and constructed in law.     

Do no harm: Technology, ethics and responsibility

The focus of this article is on issues related to personal and collective responsibility in an increasingly complex technological society. A context for discussing questions that relate to the use of technical means and the long-term secondary and tertiary benefits, impacts and consequences is established with respect to ethics and responsibility. It is proposed that there is a basic ethic for professionals in policy making roles in various fields of endeavor such as technology transfer. It is also proposed that there is a larger context within which this ethic must be grounded. The larger context concerns the question of what it means to be truly human. Many thoughtful citizens of the world, including Vaclav Havel, President of Czechoslovakia, and George Ellis, South African Cosmologist, have addressed this question, often when involved in extremely difficult circumstances. They propose that the answer can be found through a search for meaning in the universe and by freeing ourselves from self-centeredness.     

Crime scene ethics: souvenirs, teaching material, and artifacts

Police and forensic specialists are ethically obliged to preserve the integrity of their investigations and their agencies' reputations. The American Academy of Forensic Sciences and the Canadian Society of Forensic Science provide no guidelines for crime scene ethics, or the retention of items from former crime scenes. Guidelines are necessary to define acceptable behavior relating to removing, keeping, or selling artifacts, souvenirs, or teaching specimens from former crime scenes, where such activities are not illegal, to prevent potential conflicts of interest and the appearance of impropriety. Proposed guidelines permit the retention of objects with educational value, provided they are not of significance to the case, they are not removed until the scene is released, permission has been obtained from the property owner and police investigator, and the item has no significant monetary value. Permission is necessary even if objects appear discarded, or are not typically regarded as property, e.g., animal bones.