Then Shih-Ning
Court of Appeal, Queensland.
J Law Med. 2004 Nov;12(2):188-204.
Human embryonic stem cell research promises to deliver in the future a whole range of therapeutic treatments, but currently governments in different jurisdictions must try to regulate this burgeoning area. Part of the problem has been, and continues to be, polarised community opinion on the use of human embryonic stem cells for research. This article compares the approaches of the Australian, United Kingdom and United States governments in regulating human embryonic stem cell research. To date, these governments have approached the issue through implementing legislation or policy to control research. Similarly, the three jurisdictions have viewed the patentability of human embryonic stem cell technologies in their own ways with different policies being adopted by the three patent offices. This article examines these different approaches and discusses the inevitable concerns that have been raised due to the lack of a universal approach in relation to the regulation of research; the patenting of stem cell technologies; and the effects patents granted are having on further human embryonic stem cell research.
人类胚胎干细胞研究有望在未来带来一系列治疗方法，但目前不同司法管辖区的政府必须努力对这一新兴领域进行监管。部分问题一直存在且仍在持续，即社会对于将人类胚胎干细胞用于研究存在两极分化的观点。本文比较了澳大利亚、英国和美国政府在监管人类胚胎干细胞研究方面的做法。迄今为止，这些政府通过实施立法或政策来控制研究以应对这一问题。同样，这三个司法管辖区对人类胚胎干细胞技术的可专利性持有各自的看法，三个专利局也采取了不同的政策。本文审视了这些不同的做法，并讨论了由于在研究监管、干细胞技术专利授予以及所授予的专利对进一步的人类胚胎干细胞研究产生的影响等方面缺乏统一方法而引发的必然担忧。
