摘要
在弗林案中,美国法院认为通过外周血干细胞单采技术从血中获取的造血干细胞是血液的子部分而非骨髓的子部分,因而《国家器官移植法》的补偿禁令不适用于此项新技术。尽管此判决具有些许瑕疵,但其确立了骨髓捐献的补偿机制,对增加骨髓造血干细胞移植具有积极的政策意义。对于采用外周血干细胞单采技术进行的骨髓捐献,我国应允许补偿机制,现阶段应优先考虑社会规律而非自然规律,因而对此问题宜准用《献血法》而非《人体器官移植条例》。
In Flynn vs. Holder,the court held that the hematopoietic stem cells taken from the blood by peripheral blood stem cell apheresis were a subpart of the blood rather than a subpart of the bone marrow, resulting that the compensation ban in National Organ Transplant Act was not applied to peripheral blood stem cell apheresis. Though this decision had some defects,it allowed the compensation for bone marrow donation, which would bring some positive policy significance. China should allow compensation in the area of marrow donation by peripheral blood stem cell apheresis because of social policy＇s priority over the law of nature. Therefore in China, Blood Donation Law, rather than Organ Transplant Regulation, should be applied in the area of donation by peripheral blood stem cell apheresis.
出处
《南京医科大学学报（社会科学版）》
2014年第1期21-25,共5页
Journal of Nanjing Medical University（Social Sciences）
基金
上海地方高校大文科学术新人培育计划(2013年)
关键词
外周血干细胞单采技术
骨髓捐献补偿机制
弗林案
《人体器官移植条例》
《献血法》
peripheral blood stem cell apheresis
compensation for bone marrow donation
Flynn vs. Holder
Organ Transplant Regulation
Blood Donation Law
