Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/4929

Bill Overview

Title: Consensual Donation and Research Integrity Act of 2022

Description: This bill requires entities that acquire or transfer human bodies or body parts for education, research, or the advancement of medical, dental, or mortuary science to register with the Department of Health and Human Services. Registered entities must comply with record-keeping, labeling, packaging, and disposition requirements. The registration and related requirements do not apply to (1) the acquisition or transfer of human bodies or body parts for use in human transplantation, or (2) the preparation, transportation, and final disposition of human bodies or body parts by funeral service professionals.

Sponsors: Sen. Murphy, Christopher [D-CT]

Target Audience

Population: Entities acquiring or transferring human bodies for education, research or medical purposes

Estimated Size: 1000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

University Researcher (Boston, MA)

Age: 35 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe these regulations will add clarity and uniform standards that benefit research integrity.
  • Our university already adheres to strict ethical standards, and this will reinforce those efforts.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Medical Student (Raleigh, NC)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's vital to ensure good legal and ethical practices as I start my medical career. This policy is reassuring for the future.
  • However, I hope these regulations don't burden the educational process.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 7 7

Biotech Company Executive (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 47 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Our industry must uphold the highest ethical standards, and this regulation helps.
  • Adapting compliance measures might be initially burdensome, but it's for the greater good.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

Funeral Director (Houston, TX)

Age: 62 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's important for research ethics, even if this doesn't directly affect our operations.
  • I foresee more respect and trust in research projects and institutions.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 5 5
Year 5 5 5
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 5 5

Ethics Professor (Chicago, IL)

Age: 50 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 9

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is a step forward in aligning research practices with ethical expectations.
  • I expect to see positive contributions to the discourse on bioethics.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 9 9
Year 2 9 9
Year 3 9 9
Year 5 9 9
Year 10 9 9
Year 20 9 9

Policy Analyst (New York, NY)

Age: 44 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Regulation is often necessary for supporting trust in scientific institutions.
  • I am curious about the practical implementation and its impacts on affected entities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Graduate Student (Austin, TX)

Age: 25 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe this policy aligns with my studies focused on ethical standards.
  • It increases my confidence in continuing research work.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Human Rights Advocate (Seattle, WA)

Age: 39 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm supportive as this promotes transparency, preventing unethical practices.
  • Advocacy for integrity will likely improve public trust.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Clinical Research Coordinator (Denver, CO)

Age: 53 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Clear policies aid in maintaining consistent ethical standards.
  • It might improve the quality of research output and attract more collaborations.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

Science Journalist (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 31 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • As a journalist, I view this as a significant development in science policy.
  • These regulations should be widely discussed to raise awareness.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)

Year 2: $18000000 (Low: $14000000, High: $22000000)

Year 3: $17000000 (Low: $13000000, High: $21000000)

Year 5: $15000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $18000000)

Year 10: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)

Year 100: $100000 (Low: $80000, High: $120000)

Key Considerations