Owning humans and parts thereof: The common law history and the recent patent controversies

As the human body acquires an intrinsic commercial value in the current bioengineering era, the will to secure control over one's destiny is infused with notions of profitability. For individuals bearing rare human materials, there is the modern promise of exploitation as pharmaceutical companies compete in a race to secure lucrative patents for inventions curing human health ailments. The pricelessness of the human body is a fading ideal in a world where human materials harvest profitable inventions.; The patenting of living inventions has been claimed to lay the foundations for a Brave New World. To award patent for a transgenic mouse is deemed tantamount to the patenting of all life forms including humans. Moral and ethical considerations have entered the objective sphere of Law. The Canadian Patent Office is at the present time one of the only Western jurisdictions refusing to grant patents for living inventions. Where do the bases for such assumptions lie?; This thesis will advocate that the original goals of the Canadian Patent Act preclude the consideration of any moral or ethical bases for opposition to patenting living inventions. The Patent Act is a tool conceived for the promotion of industry ensuring the economic welfare of the Canadian society. Moreover, the objections to the commodification of life are demonstrated as fallible as common law does not repudiate the existence of property awards within the human body.; The current debate on patenting 'living' inventions is one that compels us to question the very value of our existence and as such, warrants valid concern. Nonetheless, the patent sphere is wrongfully compelled to address such concerns as its core fundamentals are aimed at promoting that which opponents to patenting life avidly contest: The commodification and marketability of all inventions, indiscriminately of their potential for life.