who owns blood?

[Iggle Piggle]

Obviously we own our blood, but what about if we donate it or give it up for research ?
I'm asking because I have a bummer of a question on my law degree and need to argue it in 'court'

[crete]

if you donate blood willingly you no longer own it, belongs to the blood transfusion service, who then distribute it to the hospitals , once transfused to someone they then own it, the problem would be if blood were taken from you without your consent.

[pussnboots]

Try the LAW section my daughter is a solicitor and often goes on that site.

[stewey]

Iggle, I think that we could respond in a more informative manner (whether we're right or not) if you posed the actual question which has been put to you. "Who owns blood?" is rather meaningless.

[grumpii]

The government, and they sell it to the Germans, cos you get paid to donate blood in Germany. They have a national shortage cos the only donors are tramps, alcoholics and heroin addicts.

[Octavius]

Tissue samples (including blood) donated for research are treated as gifts or donations, although gifts with conditions attached. This is preferable from a moral and ethical point of view, as it promotes the �gift relationship� and underlines the altruistic motivation of obtaining samples.

If samples taken for research are to be treated as gifts, there must be a recipient, to whom formal responsibility for custodianship of a donated sample of material is transferred. When consent is obtained, the donor (or the person giving consent in the case of material obtained after death) needs to understand that he/she is making a donation of the sample for use in research and hence surrendering ownership.

[Joe_the_Lion]

Under the Theft Act, body parts including blood, organs etc (but not sperm) are NOT classified as property.

Things change when there is an alteration process, such as embalming. Hence stealing body parts from a morgue, say, is not an offence under the theft act. Hence, if the morgue is broken in to for this purpose, it can not be a burglary.

An embalmed body, however, is property, belonging to the coroner.

Blood can be property if it has a plasma purification substance, for example, and it will belong to the organistion who has taken it. i.e the NHS, private hospitals etc, dieticians etc.

There is case law on this, but i'll be bu66ered if I can remember. The theives of unaltered blood (some vampire sect I believe) were charged with the theft of the containers or vials only.

Like all theft, the ownership of the "altered" blood can change hands many times. Once it is inside another human, the altered stae reverts back to unaltered. Live and connected body tissue and parts on a live person are not property.

There is also case law on somebody "stealing" hair by cutting it off. There was an assault, but no theft.

Hope this helps.

[Joe_the_Lion]

Just seen your question on Law, now I do not feel as smart!!

If your law degree is as boring as hell (though criminal law is the most interesting) inject some "what if" humour in to the essay.

For example:

If somebody has a pace maker and this is known by kidnappers, and the kidnapping case fails, is there a theft? Or a pigs heart?

Are ashes of the deceased property, and who owns them?

If underwater and drowing, can you steal air from somebody's lungs? (dishonesty being the other one is drowing as well)

Can a Jehover's Witness "steal" or "handle" altered tissue if his purpose is to get a place in heaven. I do not believe the act caters for this.

I could go on, but I may bore you further.

[crete]

indeed you may ,

[Joe_the_Lion]

Fcuk off crete you foul creature. This is a serious thread yet again spoiled by ignorant wrinkled hags like you.

[society]

Please go on Joe, your response is quite intriguing. I want to hear more. :-)

[crete]

indeed it is a serious question and answered by some appropriately. in what circumstances are dieticians given blood products eg plasma white blood cells or red blood cells, do they add it to the food for patients ?

[Joe_the_Lion]

Well the last time I gave blood was to Holland and Barrett for a food intolerance test, so that pi55es on your fire doesn't it.

And as you seem in fine fettle to abuse my answers lets look at your first one.

1) You do not "own" your own blood. It is not nor ever has been property

2) The tranfusee therefore does not own the blood.

3) If blood was taken without consent or emergency medical needs, it would be assault. No relevance to the question.

How thick can somebody be?? Out of ten, you come a close 8.768.

Now fcuk off.

[crete]

you just can hide good breeding and an army training, bye

[Champagne]

Don't bite, Joe. I liked your thinking too, and would love to hear more examples.

[society]

I donate blood two or sometimes three times per year. I love to do it because I believe and hope I'm helping someone in need. I think the blood bank owns the blood.

[society]

I donate blood two or sometimes three times per year. I love to do it because I believe and hope I'm helping someone in need. I think the blood bank owns the blood.

Thanks Joe!

[crete]

i agree with you champagne, but information passed on should be correct not just made up , im still interested re the dietician been given blood products, but all i receive is insults, sometimes too little knowledge is a bad thing, trying to sound clever can also be dangerous.

[paddywak]

I was a blood donor for many years until stopped by health reasons & I don't think the majority of donors give a f**k who owns the stuff so long as it does some good some where down the line

[IggyB]

come on wardy has given a good answer here - attack him when he deserves it but when its some useful essay fodder leave him be!

[Iggle Piggle]

Thanks Joe the Lion, I have found some of the cases you mentioned and can now prepare for the moot. You seem knowledgeable on the subject, are you an ex-law student ?
cheers.