Tian Ye  

Journal of ChongqingUniversity (Social Science Edition)   2016(22)

Abstract:Genetic studies are becoming commercialized more and more which may do harms to objectivity of science and human subjects too. It is necessary to exert a dutyto disclose financial interests in research on researchers. This obligation is justified by some values and policies such as individual autonomy, better trust. The fiduciary relationship between researchers and human subjects is thebase of the duty. In comparative law this kind of legal obligation does exist.The obligation should be designed better. All kinds of researchers should be responsible for this compulsive duty. It is necessary to clarify when to disclose.What to disclose should be defined properly. Process of disclosure should beset up.

Keywords: genetic research; disclosure of financial interests; autonomy; fiduciaryrelationship; mechanism of disclosure

This article can be divided into five parts.

The first part is about the realistic background of commercialization on genetic studies. It includes the expression form of economic benefits in genetic studies and motive force in commercialization on genetic studies. The expression form can be rewards of recruitment, intellectual property of research results and equity interests. The motive force is the pursuit of economic development.

The second part introduces the validity of duty to disclose financial interests in research on researchers. According to the policy consideration, such asself-willing, altruistic motivation and trust promotion, it can be confirmed.However, there are still some barriers and confusions, such as the fuzziness of disclosure scope, comprehension disorder of subjects, costs and so on.

The third part introduces the duty to disclose financial interests in research on researchers according to American law. The main regulation is Responsibility of Applicants for Promoting Objectivity in Research for which Public HealthService Funding is Sought and Responsibility Prospective Contractors. In orderto introduce this law, author quotes two cases which are R. v. Moore and R. v. Greenberg.

The fourth part is about the fiduciary relationship which is the foundation of duty to disclose financial interests. The author insists that even there isn’t medical setting between researchers and subjects, there is fiduciary relationship.

The final part is the construction of financialinterests’ disclosure mechanism. Firstly, the disclosure duty should cover all kinds of researchers. Secondly is the condition of disclosure. Thirdly is the scope of disclosure objects. Fourthly is the procedure of disclosure.