Past SIBLE Seminars

28 March 2012

Debunking some judicial myths about epidemiology and its relevance to personal injury litigation

Claire McIvor, University of Birmingham

Abstract
The recent decision of the UK Supreme Court in Sienkiewicz v Greif [2011] UKSC 11 contains a seriously misinformed account both of Epidemiology as a discipline and of its potential relevance to questions of probabilistic causation in tort law. By correcting the misconceptions and misunderstandings set out in the decision, this paper aims to demonstrate the benefits of using Epidemiologists as expert witnesses in certain categories of personal injury litigation, most notably claims for negligent diagnoses and claims in respect of negligent exposures to carcinogenic substances. The main body of the paper will present the House of Lords decision in Gregg v Scott [2005] UKHL 2 as a classic example of the errors made by the UK courts when assessing issues of probabilistic causation. It will identify problems both with the nature and source of the statistical evidence relied upon in that case and also with the manner in which the statistical data was applied to the legal principles of factual causation. It will then attempt to demonstrate how the problems with the Gregg decision could have been easily addressed through the use of a reputable epidemiological expert witness.

29 February 2012

The Phenomenology of Illness

Dr Havi Carel, University of the West of England

Abstract
Phenomenology is a useful methodology for describing and ordering experience. As such, it can be specifically applied to the first-person experience of illness, in order to illuminate this experience and to enable healthcare providers to enhance their understanding of it. However, this approach has been under-utilised in the philosophy of medicine as well as in medical training and practice. This paper demonstrates the usefulness of phenomenology to clinical medicine.
In order to describe the experience of illness, we need a phenomenological approach which gives the body a central role and acknowledges the primacy of perception. I present such a phenomenological method and show how it could usefully illuminate the experience of illness through a set of concepts taken from Merleau-Ponty. His distinction between the biological body and the body as lived, analysis of the habitual body and the notion of motor intentionality and intentional arc are used to capture the experience of illness.
I then discuss the applications this approach could have in medicine. These include narrowing the gap between objective assessments of wellbeing in illness and subjective experiences which are varied and diverse; developing a more attuned dialogue between physicians and patients, based on a thick understanding of illness; developing research methods that are informed by phenomenology and thus go beyond existing qualitative methods; improving the experience of healthcare and providing medical staff with a concrete understanding of the impact of the illness on the life-world of the patient.

14 February 2012

Regeneration and Biomythology

Niall Scott, UCLAN
In light of the date, he's going to be talking about the regeneration of heart cells, and mythology.

Read the blog article about this seminar www.law.dept.shef.ac.uk/news/

25 January 2012

Rationing and the human right to health: integral or incompatible?

Dr Keith Syrett, University of Bristol
Read the blog article about this seminar www.law.dept.shef.ac.uk/news/

26 October 2011

From Moral Status to Many Faces: The Construction of the Embryo in English Law.

Dr Sheelagh McGuinness, University of Keele
Abstract
The paper exams how the embryo is constructed in English law, starting from traditional views on moral status to more recent differentiation between different categories of embryo. The law in the area of assisted reproduction and embryology is often described as arbitrary or inconsistent. This paper shows that such inconsistencies often arise from the various ways in which the embryo is constructed. I argue that it would be impossible for the law to be any other way and that far from being arbitrary the inconsistencies are both justified and necessary.

19 May 2011

'Organ Procurement Policy and the Family Veto: Two Proposals'

Dr Lindsay Stirton, University of Sheffield and Jurgen De Wispelaere, CRÉUM, Universite de Montréal and University of Barcelona
In this article we propose to tackle the current deficit in the supply of cadaveric organs by addressing the family veto in organ donation. We believe that the family veto matters – ethically as well as practically – and that policies aimed at removing a genuine say of the family in this decision are likely to be counter-productive. To this effect we offer two proposals that aim at accommodating the problem of the family veto in ways that are compatible with the ethical goal of boosting the organ supply while also respecting donor autonomy. In a first proposal we propose to directly engage with the reasons why most families seem to object to the harvesting of a loved-one's organs who has signed up to the donor registry, notably a failure to fully understand and deliberate on the information and a reluctance to deal with this sort of decision at an emotionally distressing time. To accommodate these concerns we radically separate the process of information, deliberation and agreement about the harvesting of a potential donor's organs from the event of death and bereavement through a scheme of advance commitment. In a second proposal we examine the desirability and feasibility of a particular type of financial incentive to further induce the next-of-kin of potential donors to agree to the donation of their dead relative's organs: an Organ Transplant Tax Credit (OTTC). In this paper we outline both policies (which we argue are complementary in important ways) and discuss their main advantages and respond to a number of objections.

10 May 2011

'UK Biobank: Past, Present, and Future'

Professor Roger Browsword, King's College London
In this seminar, three sets of issues will be examined relating to public health research projects of the kind exemplified by UK Biobank. First, past issues: what precisely is the relationship between Biobank and its participants and how does consent fit in? Secondly, present issues, in particular, issues concerning access to the resource and enhancement of the collection. Thirdly, there are future issues, above all, the question of how an improved understanding of risk factors for common diseases is to be applied.

20 April 2011

'From regenerative medicine to the new genetics. Reinventing citizenship in the molecular age'

Dr Guiseppe Testa Institute of Molecular Oncology Foundation, European Institute of Oncology, University of Milan, Italy

The existence of a regulator is a feature of most activities in our society, both public and private. Whilst a justifiable response to real and perceived risk, there may be unintended consequences to ill-conceived and overly bureaucratic regulation. Sometimes inappropriate regulation has evolved that is not obviously related to the intent of the primary legislation under which it was established.
At a time when the government is considered the future of many Quangos, including the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, it is pertinent to explore their function and the associated burden. I will compare the regulation of the Abortion and IVF Clinics since they have similar ethical and political sensitivities and are covered by similarly drafted legislation; albeit with opposite clinical aims. I will demonstrate that the greater regulatory burden on IVF is not associated with any increased risk for that procedure. A tentative explanation is that the high public and political profile of the HFEA together with an overspill from its additional roles as regulator of research and policy adviser, has led to a body that has as great an interest in self preservation as in their role as an independent and impartial regulator.

14 March 2011

'The evolution of a Regulator; comparison of the experience of the IVF and abortion clinics.'

Professor Alison, Murdoch University of Newcastle

28 October 2010

'The role of the courts in new areas of technology: determining the patentability of genes'

Professor Dianne Nicol University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia

New technologies create new challenges for the law. Irrespective of whether legislation is technology neutral or technology specific, it is likely to be capable of being interpreted in a variety of ways. I argue that it is essential for test cases to be brought to the courts because of the key role they play in determining preferred interpretations. Moreover, as technologies evolve there must also be new opportunities for judicial interpretation. In this seminar, I will illustrate this point using the example of the interpretation of patent law by the courts in the area of genetic technology. I posit that governments should facilitate public interest litigation is in such areas because of the vital importance of judicial interpretation.