Greenberg v. Miami Children’s Research Institute.
Added on - 20 Sep 2019
Greenberg v. Miami Children’s Research Institute
Property rights of an individualThe research conducted by Dr. Matalon at the University of Chicago with the treatment ofCanavan disease is mainly done for identifying the reason of reason which afflicting the childrenof eastern and central European (Greenfield et al., 2006). The samples are taken by the childrenwho are suffering from Canavan disease. So the samples of tissues which are taken by theresearchers for conducting the research is an individual property which cannot be used to sell thelicense because it considers as the misappropriation of trade secrets and the researchers willobtain economic advantage from the tissue samples of an individual. According to the propertylaw, the private property of an individual cannot be used for consumption and subject to thegeneral interest. The legal person shall not be deprived of their possession unless it's of publicinterest and the subject to the condition which is provided by law. The researchers are alsoproviding the license by charging royalty fee without informing patients and financial supporterswhich come under lack of informed consent (Oberdorfer et al., 2004).ResearchersThe human subject research is defined as the research which involves human beings. Themedical research can be done by the researcher, and the similar study can be conducted by theresearchers to find the distinct results so the previous study can be used as the secondary datawhich helps to conduct the research successfully. So the licensing of research conducted by Dr.Matalon is breaching fiduciary duty because they are not acting in the best interest of anotherparty and they are rather working for own interest by selling the license with royalty fee. Thesamples taken from the patients on whom the research is conducted can be varied from one