Article info
PDFLaw, ethics and medicine
Returning to the Alder Hey report and its reporting: addressing confusions and improving inquiries
- Correspondence to: S Dewar Director of Health Policy, King’s Fund, 11–13 Cavendish Square, London W1G 0AN, UK; sdewarkehf.org.uk
Citation
Returning to the Alder Hey report and its reporting: addressing confusions and improving inquiries
Publication history
- Received December 13, 2002
- Accepted August 7, 2003
- Revised July 19, 2003
- First published October 5, 2004.
Online issue publication
April 27, 2016
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
Copyright 2004 by the Journal of Medical Ethics
Other content recommended for you
- They stole my baby’s soul: narratives of embodiment and loss
- Stored human tissue: an ethical perspective on the fate of anonymous, archival material
- Human tissue legislation: listening to the professionals
- The Alder Hey affair
- Organ retention and return: problems of consent
- Is the body a republic?
- Confidentiality and the duties of care
- New bill will regulate the retention of tissue
- Summit signals a change in the law on organ retention
- Reflecting on Redfern: What can we learn from the Alder Hey story?