Annotated Bib. IV

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=YHne2bkHd9AC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=property+rights+in+the+body&ots=QT0OxROHN4&sig=GrXQNIQf83LcrFHuw77CgA03c3Q#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Body Parts: Property Rights and the Ownership of Human Biological Materials. E. Richard Gold. Georgetown University Press, 1996.

In chapter two, there is a section that describes a court case.  In the Moore v. Regents of the University of California case, property rights within the body are discussed.  In 1976, a man named John Moore had to get his spleen removed.  The physician that operated and treated Moore kept his spleen for research.  The physician realized that Moore's spleen held special cells that he could culture.  The physician did so and made an enormous profit off of his work.  Moore found out about what the physician had done with his extracted body parts and took the matter to the courts.  Moore also drew an interest in his body parts as profit.  The courts ruled that although the way of gaining these findings was wrong, the appeal was not going to be honored because Golde's findings contributed to science and medicine.  His findings had a purpose.  This section of the book helps give an opinion of how members of scientific background view property rights in the body.  The courts overlook the profits that are gained, and look primarily at what good comes from this.