Genomic Test Results and the Courtroom: The Roles of Experts and Expert Testimony

The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, Vol. 44, pp. 205-215, Forthcoming

Temple University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2016-28

28 Pages Posted: 12 May 2016 Last revised: 7 Jun 2016

See all articles by Edward Ramos

Edward Ramos

Government of the United States of America - National Institutes of Health (NIH)

Shawneequa Callier

George Washington University - Department of Clinical Research and Leadership

Peter Swann

Government of Arizona - Division One, Arizona Court of Appeals

Hosea H. Harvey

Temple University - James E. Beasley School of Law

Date Written: May 10, 2016

Abstract

The rapid advancement from single-gene testing to whole genome sequencing has significantly broadened the type and amount of information available to researchers, physicians, patients, and the public in general. Much debate has ensued about whether genomic test results should be reported to research participants, patients and consumers, and at what stage we can be sure that existing evidence justifies their use in clinical settings. Courts and judges evaluating the utility of these results will not be immune to this uncertainty. As scholars increasingly explore the duty of care standards related to reporting genomic test results, it is timely to provide a framework for understanding how uncertainty about genetic and genomic tests influences evidentiary considerations in the court room. Here, we explore the subtleties and nuances of interpreting genetic data in an environment of substantial discord related to the value that individuals should place on genetic and genomic tests. In conjunction, we discuss the roles courts should play in qualifying experts, expert testimony, and genetic and genomic tests given the intricate and complex nature of genetic and genomic information.

Keywords: Genomic Tests; Daubert; Frye; Scientific Evidence in the Courtroom; Expert Testimony

Suggested Citation

Ramos, Edward and Callier, Shawneequa and Swann, Peter and Harvey, Hosea H., Genomic Test Results and the Courtroom: The Roles of Experts and Expert Testimony (May 10, 2016). The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, Vol. 44, pp. 205-215, Forthcoming, Temple University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2016-28, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2778093

Edward Ramos

Government of the United States of America - National Institutes of Health (NIH) ( email )

9000 Rockville Pike
Bethesda, MD 20892
United States

Shawneequa Callier

George Washington University - Department of Clinical Research and Leadership ( email )

Washington, DC
United States

Peter Swann

Government of Arizona - Division One, Arizona Court of Appeals

1501 W. Washington St.
Room 203
Phoenix, AZ 85007
United States

Hosea H. Harvey (Contact Author)

Temple University - James E. Beasley School of Law ( email )

1719 N. Broad Street
Philadelphia, PA 19122
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
57
Abstract Views
556
Rank
659,560
PlumX Metrics