Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Gleitman v. Cosgrove”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

Some legal implications of advances in human genetics.

The law which, to some extent at least, reflects contemporary mores, has not kept pace with the recent scientific advances in genetics. Because of the rate of advance in the science of genetics there is a real risk that we shall know how to change the traditional nature of man before we possess the knowledge necessary to enable us to use the new knowledge for humane purposes. Clonal reproduction may produce a creature who, for the purposes of the law, especially the criminal law, which defines when a child becomes a human being in terms of "old-fashioned" motherhood, may not be a human being, so that putting him to death may not be homicide. Similarly, in vitro fertilization and development in an artificial uterus may result in the "birth" of one who, though having human attributes, may not, in law, be a human being. While cloning and in vitro fertilization may not have immediate legal implications because of the state of the art, genetic manipulation in the form of amniocentesis has very real legal implications now because it is a matter of current practice. The assumption that detection of genetic abnormality in the foetus is a beneficial development because it enables parents to have the option of terminating the pregnancy, though valid in the United Kingdom and the United States, is invalid in Canada. Abortion on demand is not part of the law in Canada and the liberalization of the abortion provisions of the Criminal Code of Canada in 1969 expressly avoided including as a criterion for therapeutic abortion the risk that the child, if born, would be likely to suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped. Beyond the more technical issues raised by scientific advances, however, lies the fundamental question whether a handicapped life is a life not worth living.

Beginning of Human Life↗

The risk of birth defects: Jacobs v. Theimer and parents' right to know.

This Article discusses the Texas Supreme Court's holding in Jacobs v. Theimer that the parents of a defective child had a cause of action for damages against a physician for alleged negligent failure to inform the mother during pregnancy that she had contracted rubella and therefore might have a defective child, thereby causing her to lose the opportunity to have an abortion. The Article raises a number of questions that post-Jacobs courts probably will confront concerning the duty of physicians and genetic counselors to keep their clients informed; describes some social and medical developments--including recent progress in medical genetics and prenatal diagnosis--which are likely to make Jacobs a significant precedent; evaluates the court's decision to allow a damage suit only for the costs of treating and caring for the child's defects; and briefly addresses the question of whether the Jacobs case comes within the sphere of suits for what has come to be known as "wrongful birth" and "wrongful life."

Child↗

A wrongful birth?

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Abortion, Eugenic↗