# Grimes v. Kennedy Krieger Institute, Inc.

> Court of Appeals of Maryland · August 16, 2001 · 366 Md. 29

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9763828

## Case

- **Full name:** Ericka GRIMES v. KENNEDY KRIEGER INSTITUTE, INC.; Myron Higgins, a Minor, Etc., Et Al., v. Kennedy Krieger Institute, Inc.
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Maryland
- **Decided:** August 16, 2001
- **Citations:** 366 Md. 29; 782 A.2d 807; 2001 Md. LEXIS 496
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Raker
- **Judges:** Eldridge, Raker, Wilner, Cathell, Harrell, Battaglia, Karwacki
- **Cited by:** 37 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9763828

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- noting that in research studies, the consent of the child is necessarily furnished through the consent of the parent

## Opinion text

RAKER, Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the order denying the motions for reconsideration. I adhere to the views previously expressed in my concurring opinion filed herein on August 16, 2001.
The majority’s discussion of the ability of a parent or guardian to consent to the participation of a minor child in a nontherapeutic research study and the discussion regarding the ethics of the research conducted in these cases involve serious public policy considerations. The statements are a declaration of public policy that, in the posture of this case, are best left to the General Assembly. See Gaver v. Harrant, 316 Md. 17, 28-29 , 557 A.2d 210, 217 (1989); Harrison v. Mont. Co. Bd of Educ., 295 Md. 442, 460 , 456 A.2d 894, 903 (1983). Inasmuch as these issues were never raised by the pleadings or the parties below, this Court had no basis to address these very complex issues; if a change is to be made in the State’s policy of regulating research studies, unless clearly presented to the court, it should be made by legislative *121 enactment. See Md. Nat'l Bk. v. United Jewish App., 286 Md. 274 , 407 A.2d 1130 (1979). This matter merits the close scrutiny of the General Assembly. See Cotharn and Maldonado v. Board, 260 Md. 556 , 273 A.2d 115 (1971).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9763828. Public record. Not legal advice.