Fall
2005
Andrea
Bonnicksen, Zulauf 401 (753-7059), albcorn@niu.edu
This semester we will examine legal and social
regulation relating to assisted reproductive technologies, end-of-life decision
making, informed consent, and other subjects related to biomedical policy and
ethics. Using a legal casebook, we will review cases, essays, and questions
that relate to the role of autonomy in contemporary biomedical law. In this
class you can expect to (l) understand the role of precedent in the evolution
of law, (2) trace the development of law in specific areas of medicine, (3)
gain experience in briefing cases, and (4) gain a foundation for grappling with
legal issues remaining in contemporary biomedical ethics.
TEXTBOOK:
Marsha Garrison and Carl E. Schneider, The Law of Bioethics: Individual Autonomy
and
Social Regulation. St. Paul, MN: The
West Group, 2003.
Internet materials are indicated below by their URLs.
Please print them for use in class.
Materials posted on electronic reserve are indicated as ER below. They will be available
by the
third week of class. Other materials will occasionally be available on
NIU’s
Blackboard system.
INTRODUCTION
(AUGUST 24)
Citation
styles, writing case briefs
Garrison and
Schneider, 1-26
Nature
of illness
Hippocratic
Oath and AMA Principles of Medical Ethics
Bioethical
principles
The
question of regulation
AUTONOMY AND
INFORMED CONSENT (AUGUST 31, SEPTEMBER 7)
Garrison and
Schneider, 27-54, 61-63, 70- 108, 133-136, 146-150
Informed
consent
Canterbury v. Spence (1972)
Principles
of informed consent
LAW AT THE END OF
LIFE (SEPTEMBER 7, 14, 21)
Garrison and
Schneider, 190-203, 207-215, 219-224
George J.
Annas, “’Culture of Life’ Politics at the Bedside – The Case of Terri Schiavo.” New England Journal of Medicine 352(16):1710-15 (April 21,
2005). ER
Timothy E.
Quill, “Terri Schiavo – A Tragedy Compounded.” New England Journal
of Medicine 352(16):1630-33
(April 21, 2005). ER
S. 686. “For the relief of the parents of
Theresa Marie Schiavo.” 109th Congress. 1st
Session.
U.S. Senate, March 20, 2005. ER
Garrison
and Schneider, 233-246, 267-283, 289-308, 321-322, 350-370
Defining
death: In re Welfare of Bowman (1980)
Relationship
between death and organ transplantation
Changing
the definition of death? In re T.A.C.P.
(1992)
Stopping end of
life treatment
Do Not Resuscitate
orders
When the patient is
not dying: Bouvia v. Superior Court
(1986)
McKay v. Bergstedt (1990)
Patient autonomy
Religious duties: In re Matter of Dubreuil (1993)
Leaving evidence of
wishes: Cruzan v. Director 497 U.S.
261 (1990)
Advance directives:
sample laws, enforcing ADs, drafting ADs
CHOOSING CHILDREN
(SEPTEMBER 28, OCTOBER 5, 12)
Garrison and Schneider, 825-884
Frozen
embryos: Davis v. Davis (1992)
Research
using embryos: Lifchez v. Hartigan
(1990)
Determining
parenthood: Johnson v. Calvert (1993)
Moschetta
v. Moschetta (1994)
In re Buzzanca (1998)
Regulating
assisted reproductive technologies
TEST # 1 (OCTOBER
5)
THE BODY AS
COMMODITY (OCTOBER 19, 26)
Garrison and
Schneider, 645-702, 707-716, 722-738
Moore v. Regents of the University of
California (1990)
Hecht v. Superior Court (Kane) (1993)
McFall
v. Shimp (1978)
Uniform Anatomical
Gift Act (1987)
State
of Florida v. Powell (1986)
Retrieving
spermatozoa after death
Need for organs
Mandated choice
proposal
Marketing human
organs
Leaving the field
Marketing ova and
spermatozoa
TEST # 2 (NOVEMBER 2)
DECIDING FOR INCOMPETENT
PATIENTS (NOVEMBER 2, 9)
Garrison and
Schneider, 467-475, 485-493, 506-512, 555-594, 601-608
Deciding
competence: Lane v. Candura (1978)
When patients were
once competent: In re Conroy (1984)
Substituted judgment
and best interest standards
Making medical
decisions for children
The older child
Newborn infants
Conjoined twins
PAPER DUE (NOVEMBER
16)
PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED
SUICIDE (NOVEMBER 16)
Garrison and
Schneider, 326-337, 399-413, 431-439, 451-457
The case
of Diane
Physician-assisted
suicide: Washington v. Glucksberg 521
U.S. 702 (1997)
Oregon
legislation permitting physician-assisted suicide
Oregon
v. Ashcroft 368 F.3d 1118 (9th Cir.2004). Available at the
following:
www.findlaw.com and then:
Professionals
– browse by jurisdiction – federal
U.S.
Courts of Appeal (9th Cir.)
Docket
# 02-35587
Print
majority opinion (pp. 1-24)
Netherlands
legislation permitting physician-assisted suicide
MATERNAL-FETAL
CONFLICT (NOVEMBER 30)
Garrison
and Schneider, 739-765
Abortion:
Roe v. Wade 410 U.S. 113 (1973)
Abortion:
Planned Parenthood v. Casey 505 U.S. 833 (1992)
TEST # 3 DECEMBER
7 6:00 – 7:50 p.m.
USEFUL WEBSITES AND
SOURCES
oyez.org
(U.S.Supreme Court)
http://thomas.loc.gov
(U.S. legislative, executive, judicial branches)
uscourts.gov
supremecourtus.gov
findlaw.com
bioethics.upenn.edu
See daily New York Times for coverage of legal
biomedical issues
GRADES AND OTHER
MATTERS
Grades will be based on three in-class and one take-home
exam worth 50 points each and a participation score worth 30 points.
Exam # 1 50
points October 5
Exam # 2 50
points November 2
Exam # 3 50
points December 7
Paper 40
points November 16
Two legal briefs (5 pts each) 10 points To
be announced
Participation 20 points
______
220 points
198 – 220 = A; 176 – 197 = B; 154 - 175 = C; 132 – 153 =
D; below l32 = F
Exams.—Exams will be given October 5, November 2, and
December 7. The first of these exams will be open-book. If this format
works well and people do their own writing, the second and third in-class exams
will be open-book also. Make-up exams will be given only for documented medical
reasons or a death in the family and only if the instructor is notified by
telephone BEFORE the examination (815-753-7059). On exam days, class will resume
for the approximately one hour after the exam is completed.
Briefs.—Two written briefs of cases covered in class will be
due in writing early in the semester to give experience in writing briefs and
receiving feedback. Each should be approximately one typed single-spaced page.
Each will be worth 5 points. Subheadings will be:
I. Facts
II. Question(s) for the court
III. Ruling
IV. Reasoning.
Papers. – A paper worth 40 points will be due November 16. Several hypothetical cases
will be given in class. Each student will select a case of interest and take on
the role of legal counsel for one of the cases. Each will write a paper arguing
for the client’s position in court. The papers are to be 5-6 double-spaced
pages long.
Participation. – All class members are expected to
read the material before it is covered in class and participate in discussions
that will revolve around questions posed by the book’s authors. To encourage
careful reading and informed discussion based on the reading, 20 points will be
allocated as follows:
18 – 20 points = regular, informed
participation
regular attendance (1 or no absences)
16 – 17 points = occasional and thoughtful
participation
attendance (2 or fewer absences)
14 – 15 points = fairly regular attendance (3
absences)
12 – 13 points = infrequent attendance (4
absences)
10 – 11 points = rare attendance (5 absences)
5
points = more than 5 absences
Attendance credit is given to those who remain the
entire class session. Those who must
leave a few minutes early should mention this to me before class begins. To
make sure all have a chance to contribute I will occasionally call on students.
I also appeal to the grace of individuals who are more talkative to raise their
hands to be recognized before speaking so that all students may be given the
opportunity to contribute. Occasionally students will be asked to break into
groups to discuss an issue. Participation in these groups will count toward class participation.
Manners.-- You are asked to arrive on time at 6:30. If lateness
becomes a problem during the semester, I will close the door and post a note
requesting no one to enter. If you have an appointment that requires you to
leave early, let me know ahead of time and then sit in a chair near the door.
Turn off cell phones before class begins.
CAAR.-- NIU can make reasonable accommodations for students
with documented disabilities. Students with disabilities for which they may
need accommodations should contact the Center for Access-Ability Resources
(CAAR) on the fourth floor of the Health Services Building during the first two
weeks of the semester.
Paper awards.-- The Department of Political
Science annually recognizes outstanding undergraduate papers written in
conjunction with 300-400 level political science courses (all majors are
welcome to compete). Winners are expected to attend the Department’s spring
graduation ceremony where they will receive a certificate and $50.00. Submit
three papers from any undergraduate political science class to a department
secretary in Zulauf 315 by February 28. All copies should have two cover pages
– one with the student’s name and one without. Only papers written in the
previous calendar year (2004) can be
considered for the 2006 award. However, papers completed in the current spring
semester are eligible for the 2006 competition even if the author has
graduated.
Website. -- You are encouraged to consult the Department of Political Science website (http://polisci.niu.edu) to help you contact faculty and staff, explore graduate programs and career options, and track department events and activities.