Consent and nothing but consent? The organ retention scandal.

School of Applied Social Studies, Faculty of Health and Social Care, The Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, UK.
Sociology of Health & Illness (Impact Factor: 1.88). 12/2007; 29(7):1023-42. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.01031.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The organ retention scandal arose in the UK in the autumn of 1999 when knowledge of the practice of organ and tissue retention after post-mortem for subsequent diagnostic, teaching, audit and research purposes fully entered the public domain. Many families were shocked and distressed to realise that by allowing a post-mortem on their relative or child they were also deemed to have agreed to the long-term retention of organs and tissues and thus had buried or cremated, as they perceived it, not a 'whole' body but an 'empty shell'. Subsequently, informed consent was placed at the centre of recommendations for reform, now given expression in the Human Tissue Act (2004). Through a discourse analysis of the documentary evidence produced in the wake of the organ retention scandal, I argue that the emphasis on informed consent masks concerns about body wholeness. In addition, whilst informed consent is posited as key in 'balancing' the rights of the individual over the needs of medical science, this position is tempered by the concurrent presence of notions of the gift relationship and post-mortem citizenship. Incorporating these notions alongside the discourse of consent also renders concerns about the commodification of the body less acute.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper reports on the qualitative component of a mixed-methods study on unlinked anonymous testing for HIV in genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinics in two English cities. Unlinked anonymous testing is a system of monitoring population prevalence by testing residual blood samples taken for diagnostic purposes after they have been unlinked and anonymised from their source. Little is known about how individuals feel about their blood being tested in this way without their explicit consent, nor is it clear whether the process of unlinking blood affects how people feel about the use of their bodily material for public health surveillance purposes. We report participants' views on these issues, drawing on in-depth interviews with 20 GUM clinic users. The majority thought it preferable for blood samples to be used for population surveillance rather than being discarded. For most, blood and bodily tissue were not seen to represent personal identity even though participants understood that information about them could be gleaned from their analysis. The provision of information, rather than a strict consent process, was advocated as many felt that transactions between health professionals and patients should be as transparent as possible.
    Culture Health & Sexuality 05/2013; · 1.55 Impact Factor