Abstract
In Chapter 1, I demonstrated that an individualistic conception of autonomy is at the core of the jurisprudential interpretation of the duty to inform in Canada. One consequence of this is that the duty to inform in research is more exacting than in the clinic setting. Participants, accordingly, have a right to receive “full and frank disclosure of all the facts, opinions, and probabilities” during their consent to a research project. This standard is binding on all researchers working with human participants in Canada. At present, there is no legislation or case law that specifically provides an alternative standard for population biobanks. For this reason, population biobank researchers are expected to abide by the same exacting standard followed by researchers in other contexts.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
