Chunk #75 — PART II. CORE QUESTIONS — F. What is the Content of those Responsibilities? Four Issues and Who Should Address Them — Step 1: Clarifying the criteria and roster
Thus, both Wolf et al.1 and Fabsitz et al.86 recognize reproductive importance as legitimate grounds for return of IFs and IRRs. This makes sense in genetic and genomic research, where some of the key findings concern heritability. We here follow the path of the Fabsitz et al. paper by suggesting that findings of reproductive importance should fall in the “may return” category. Our group debated whether a subset of reproductive findings belong in the “must return” category, but did not reach agreement on this point. Thus, return of reproductive findings, together with findings of personal utility (i.e., useful for life planning and decisions), should be discretionary.
