Passage 1Two legal cases, one in Germany and one still ongoing in the UK, show how the limits ofpatient confidentiality are being tested, and how this challenges long-established medical norms.In a trial coming up at the High Court in London soon, a woman is suing the hospital that diagnosed her father with Huntington's disease for not informing her. Huntington's is a fatal,incurable neurodegenerative (神经变性的) disorder caused by a mutation (突变) in a single gene. Every child of an affected parent has a 50 per cent chance of inheriting the mutation.The woman argues that, had she known her father's diagnosis, she wouldn't have given birth to her daughter, who is now herself at risk of Huntington's. Currently, in the UK as in many other countries, doctors are legally obliged to respect the confidentiality of patients unless they consent to their information being shared.Guidelines issued by professional organisations do acknowledge that situations can arise where a doctor has a duty of disclosure to third parties even in the absence of consent. The High Court trial will test whether that duty of disclosure should also be recognised in law.That could bring some much needed clarity to the area, but also create new problems. What if I test positive for a disease-causing gene variant and my family members, who didn't consent to be tested themselves, don't want to know they are at risk?This question was raised by a German case in which a woman sued a doctor for telling her that her ex-husband had Huntington's, meaning that their two children were at risk. The doctor acted with the consent of his patient, the ex-husband, but the woman's lawyers argued that the information was useless to her because the condition can't be cured and the children were too young to be tested anyway. Knowing her ex-husband's diagnosis without being able to act on it, the woman claimed, had sent her into a reactive depression and left her unable to work.The German case ended with a final decision that favoured the doctor, despite the fact that, unlike in the UK, the right not to know is legally protected in Germany, with respect to genetic information.Balancing these various rights isn't easy. In most cases, a gene test is likely to reveal only an increased risk of disease. The real problem is that the law is black-and-white, while predictive medicine is all about grey. What do the two legal cases both involve?

Passage 1Two legal cases, one in Germany and one still ongoing in the UK, show how the limits ofpatient confidentiality are being tested, and how this challenges long-established medical norms.In a trial coming up at the High Court in London soon, a woman is suing the hospital that diagnosed her father with Huntington's disease for not informing her. Huntington's is a fatal,incurable neurodegenerative (神经变性的) disorder caused by a mutation (突变) in a single gene. Every child of an affected parent has a 50 per cent chance of inheriting the mutation.The woman argues that, had she known her father's diagnosis, she wouldn't have given birth to her daughter, who is now herself at risk of Huntington's. Currently, in the UK as in many other countries, doctors are legally obliged to respect the confidentiality of patients unless they consent to their information being shared.Guidelines issued by professional organisations do acknowledge that situations can arise where a doctor has a duty of disclosure to third parties even in the absence of consent. The High Court trial will test whether that duty of disclosure should also be recognised in law.That could bring some much needed clarity to the area, but also create new problems. What if I test positive for a disease-causing gene variant and my family members, who didn't consent to be tested themselves, don't want to know they are at risk?This question was raised by a German case in which a woman sued a doctor for telling her that her ex-husband had Huntington's, meaning that their two children were at risk. The doctor acted with the consent of his patient, the ex-husband, but the woman's lawyers argued that the information was useless to her because the condition can't be cured and the children were too young to be tested anyway. Knowing her ex-husband's diagnosis without being able to act on it, the woman claimed, had sent her into a reactive depression and left her unable to work.The German case ended with a final decision that favoured the doctor, despite the fact that, unlike in the UK, the right not to know is legally protected in Germany, with respect to genetic information.Balancing these various rights isn't easy. In most cases, a gene test is likely to reveal only an increased risk of disease. The real problem is that the law is black-and-white, while predictive medicine is all about grey. What information can we get from the London case?

Passage 1Two legal cases, one in Germany and one still ongoing in the UK, show how the limits ofpatient confidentiality are being tested, and how this challenges long-established medical norms.In a trial coming up at the High Court in London soon, a woman is suing the hospital that diagnosed her father with Huntington's disease for not informing her. Huntington's is a fatal,incurable neurodegenerative (神经变性的) disorder caused by a mutation (突变) in a single gene. Every child of an affected parent has a 50 per cent chance of inheriting the mutation.The woman argues that, had she known her father's diagnosis, she wouldn't have given birth to her daughter, who is now herself at risk of Huntington's. Currently, in the UK as in many other countries, doctors are legally obliged to respect the confidentiality of patients unless they consent to their information being shared.Guidelines issued by professional organisations do acknowledge that situations can arise where a doctor has a duty of disclosure to third parties even in the absence of consent. The High Court trial will test whether that duty of disclosure should also be recognised in law.That could bring some much needed clarity to the area, but also create new problems. What if I test positive for a disease-causing gene variant and my family members, who didn't consent to be tested themselves, don't want to know they are at risk?This question was raised by a German case in which a woman sued a doctor for telling her that her ex-husband had Huntington's, meaning that their two children were at risk. The doctor acted with the consent of his patient, the ex-husband, but the woman's lawyers argued that the information was useless to her because the condition can't be cured and the children were too young to be tested anyway. Knowing her ex-husband's diagnosis without being able to act on it, the woman claimed, had sent her into a reactive depression and left her unable to work.The German case ended with a final decision that favoured the doctor, despite the fact that, unlike in the UK, the right not to know is legally protected in Germany, with respect to genetic information.Balancing these various rights isn't easy. In most cases, a gene test is likely to reveal only an increased risk of disease. The real problem is that the law is black-and-white, while predictive medicine is all about grey. In the London case, the duty of disclosure ().

Passage 1Two legal cases, one in Germany and one still ongoing in the UK, show how the limits ofpatient confidentiality are being tested, and how this challenges long-established medical norms.In a trial coming up at the High Court in London soon, a woman is suing the hospital that diagnosed her father with Huntington's disease for not informing her. Huntington's is a fatal,incurable neurodegenerative (神经变性的) disorder caused by a mutation (突变) in a single gene. Every child of an affected parent has a 50 per cent chance of inheriting the mutation.The woman argues that, had she known her father's diagnosis, she wouldn't have given birth to her daughter, who is now herself at risk of Huntington's. Currently, in the UK as in many other countries, doctors are legally obliged to respect the confidentiality of patients unless they consent to their information being shared.Guidelines issued by professional organisations do acknowledge that situations can arise where a doctor has a duty of disclosure to third parties even in the absence of consent. The High Court trial will test whether that duty of disclosure should also be recognised in law.That could bring some much needed clarity to the area, but also create new problems. What if I test positive for a disease-causing gene variant and my family members, who didn't consent to be tested themselves, don't want to know they are at risk?This question was raised by a German case in which a woman sued a doctor for telling her that her ex-husband had Huntington's, meaning that their two children were at risk. The doctor acted with the consent of his patient, the ex-husband, but the woman's lawyers argued that the information was useless to her because the condition can't be cured and the children were too young to be tested anyway. Knowing her ex-husband's diagnosis without being able to act on it, the woman claimed, had sent her into a reactive depression and left her unable to work.The German case ended with a final decision that favoured the doctor, despite the fact that, unlike in the UK, the right not to know is legally protected in Germany, with respect to genetic information.Balancing these various rights isn't easy. In most cases, a gene test is likely to reveal only an increased risk of disease. The real problem is that the law is black-and-white, while predictive medicine is all about grey. In the German case, the woman ().

Passage 1Two legal cases, one in Germany and one still ongoing in the UK, show how the limits ofpatient confidentiality are being tested, and how this challenges long-established medical norms.In a trial coming up at the High Court in London soon, a woman is suing the hospital that diagnosed her father with Huntington's disease for not informing her. Huntington's is a fatal,incurable neurodegenerative (神经变性的) disorder caused by a mutation (突变) in a single gene. Every child of an affected parent has a 50 per cent chance of inheriting the mutation.The woman argues that, had she known her father's diagnosis, she wouldn't have given birth to her daughter, who is now herself at risk of Huntington's. Currently, in the UK as in many other countries, doctors are legally obliged to respect the confidentiality of patients unless they consent to their information being shared.Guidelines issued by professional organisations do acknowledge that situations can arise where a doctor has a duty of disclosure to third parties even in the absence of consent. The High Court trial will test whether that duty of disclosure should also be recognised in law.That could bring some much needed clarity to the area, but also create new problems. What if I test positive for a disease-causing gene variant and my family members, who didn't consent to be tested themselves, don't want to know they are at risk?This question was raised by a German case in which a woman sued a doctor for telling her that her ex-husband had Huntington's, meaning that their two children were at risk. The doctor acted with the consent of his patient, the ex-husband, but the woman's lawyers argued that the information was useless to her because the condition can't be cured and the children were too young to be tested anyway. Knowing her ex-husband's diagnosis without being able to act on it, the woman claimed, had sent her into a reactive depression and left her unable to work.The German case ended with a final decision that favoured the doctor, despite the fact that, unlike in the UK, the right not to know is legally protected in Germany, with respect to genetic information.Balancing these various rights isn't easy. In most cases, a gene test is likely to reveal only an increased risk of disease. The real problem is that the law is black-and-white, while predictive medicine is all about grey. Which of the following explains the statement“the law is black-and-white”?

Passage 2Whether in public or private schools, teachers worried that their students with poor writing skills will suffer in college and the workplace. Some felt torn between their desire to enforce the rules and their fear of sucking the joy out of self-expression. And many were uncertain about how to help teenagers who didn't learn the foundations of grammar.Eighteen teachers met for a class last week with Mary Norris, a veteran copy editor at The New Yorker. The Academy for Teachers sponsored the class in the Manhattan offices of Scholastic, a publishing company.Ms. Norris began with a lighthearted demonstration of her perfectionism. Then she led the group in fixing mistakes she found in the media. Pointing to one example, she stressed that to put a comma between a subject and verb is a great error.Catherine Conley, a teacher at St.Jean Baptiste High School, said that is“something my students love to do.As the day went on, teachers expressed more concerns. They said formal grammar lessons have fallen by the wayside because of time constraints, an emphasis on hands-on projects and other priorities. Schools focus on reading comprehension and material emphasized on state tests, they said.Erika Stark, who teaches English at Bronxdale High School, said her supervisors want her to concentrate on meaning and analysis, not grammar, but she couldn't ignore her 10th-graders' mistakes.Several teachers said they struggle to deal with how much to be purists about spelling and punctuation (标点) in the era of texting. Their students often use abbreviations (缩写) in homework, such as “u” for “you," and some see a period as a sign of aggression.Ambar Paulino, an English teacher at DeWitt Clinton High School, said some of her students use slang such as “ain't” and neglect subject-verb agreement when they speak. They don't realize they need to be more formal in academic writing. “T'm trying to find a balance so I'm alowving my students to find their voice but still follow some of the rules," she said.Teresa Genaro, who teaches literature at the Packer Collegiate Institute, said she could envisage a day when writers no longer use capital letters at all. She corrects students who fail to capitalize “I” or “Catholic," but also questions the necessity because she understands their intent.Ms. Genaro has her students write about rules that they think should be abandoned and why.“They are very compelling," she said.What is the teachers' main concern about their students?

Passage 2Whether in public or private schools, teachers worried that their students with poor writing skills will suffer in college and the workplace. Some felt torn between their desire to enforce the rules and their fear of sucking the joy out of self-expression. And many were uncertain about how to help teenagers who didn't learn the foundations of grammar.Eighteen teachers met for a class last week with Mary Norris, a veteran copy editor at The New Yorker. The Academy for Teachers sponsored the class in the Manhattan offices of Scholastic, a publishing company.Ms. Norris began with a lighthearted demonstration of her perfectionism. Then she led the group in fixing mistakes she found in the media. Pointing to one example, she stressed that to put a comma between a subject and verb is a great error.Catherine Conley, a teacher at St.Jean Baptiste High School, said that is“something my students love to do.As the day went on, teachers expressed more concerns. They said formal grammar lessons have fallen by the wayside because of time constraints, an emphasis on hands-on projects and other priorities. Schools focus on reading comprehension and material emphasized on state tests, they said.Erika Stark, who teaches English at Bronxdale High School, said her supervisors want her to concentrate on meaning and analysis, not grammar, but she couldn't ignore her 10th-graders' mistakes.Several teachers said they struggle to deal with how much to be purists about spelling and punctuation (标点) in the era of texting. Their students often use abbreviations (缩写) in homework, such as “u” for “you," and some see a period as a sign of aggression.Ambar Paulino, an English teacher at DeWitt Clinton High School, said some of her students use slang such as “ain't” and neglect subject-verb agreement when they speak. They don't realize they need to be more formal in academic writing. “T'm trying to find a balance so I'm alowving my students to find their voice but still follow some of the rules," she said.Teresa Genaro, who teaches literature at the Packer Collegiate Institute, said she could envisage a day when writers no longer use capital letters at all. She corrects students who fail to capitalize “I” or “Catholic," but also questions the necessity because she understands their intent.Ms. Genaro has her students write about rules that they think should be abandoned and why.“They are very compelling," she said.What do we know about Ms.Norris?

Passage 2Whether in public or private schools, teachers worried that their students with poor writing skills will suffer in college and the workplace. Some felt torn between their desire to enforce the rules and their fear of sucking the joy out of self-expression. And many were uncertain about how to help teenagers who didn't learn the foundations of grammar.Eighteen teachers met for a class last week with Mary Norris, a veteran copy editor at The New Yorker. The Academy for Teachers sponsored the class in the Manhattan offices of Scholastic, a publishing company.Ms. Norris began with a lighthearted demonstration of her perfectionism. Then she led the group in fixing mistakes she found in the media. Pointing to one example, she stressed that to put a comma between a subject and verb is a great error.Catherine Conley, a teacher at St.Jean Baptiste High School, said that is“something my students love to do.As the day went on, teachers expressed more concerns. They said formal grammar lessons have fallen by the wayside because of time constraints, an emphasis on hands-on projects and other priorities. Schools focus on reading comprehension and material emphasized on state tests, they said.Erika Stark, who teaches English at Bronxdale High School, said her supervisors want her to concentrate on meaning and analysis, not grammar, but she couldn't ignore her 10th-graders' mistakes.Several teachers said they struggle to deal with how much to be purists about spelling and punctuation (标点) in the era of texting. Their students often use abbreviations (缩写) in homework, such as “u” for “you," and some see a period as a sign of aggression.Ambar Paulino, an English teacher at DeWitt Clinton High School, said some of her students use slang such as “ain't” and neglect subject-verb agreement when they speak. They don't realize they need to be more formal in academic writing. “T'm trying to find a balance so I'm alowving my students to find their voice but still follow some of the rules," she said.Teresa Genaro, who teaches literature at the Packer Collegiate Institute, said she could envisage a day when writers no longer use capital letters at all. She corrects students who fail to capitalize “I” or “Catholic," but also questions the necessity because she understands their intent.Ms. Genaro has her students write about rules that they think should be abandoned and why.“They are very compelling," she said.What has been dropped due to time constraints according to the teachers?

Passage 2Whether in public or private schools, teachers worried that their students with poor writing skills will suffer in college and the workplace. Some felt torn between their desire to enforce the rules and their fear of sucking the joy out of self-expression. And many were uncertain about how to help teenagers who didn't learn the foundations of grammar.Eighteen teachers met for a class last week with Mary Norris, a veteran copy editor at The New Yorker. The Academy for Teachers sponsored the class in the Manhattan offices of Scholastic, a publishing company.Ms. Norris began with a lighthearted demonstration of her perfectionism. Then she led the group in fixing mistakes she found in the media. Pointing to one example, she stressed that to put a comma between a subject and verb is a great error.Catherine Conley, a teacher at St.Jean Baptiste High School, said that is“something my students love to do.As the day went on, teachers expressed more concerns. They said formal grammar lessons have fallen by the wayside because of time constraints, an emphasis on hands-on projects and other priorities. Schools focus on reading comprehension and material emphasized on state tests, they said.Erika Stark, who teaches English at Bronxdale High School, said her supervisors want her to concentrate on meaning and analysis, not grammar, but she couldn't ignore her 10th-graders' mistakes.Several teachers said they struggle to deal with how much to be purists about spelling and punctuation (标点) in the era of texting. Their students often use abbreviations (缩写) in homework, such as “u” for “you," and some see a period as a sign of aggression.Ambar Paulino, an English teacher at DeWitt Clinton High School, said some of her students use slang such as “ain't” and neglect subject-verb agreement when they speak. They don't realize they need to be more formal in academic writing. “T'm trying to find a balance so I'm alowving my students to find their voice but still follow some of the rules," she said.Teresa Genaro, who teaches literature at the Packer Collegiate Institute, said she could envisage a day when writers no longer use capital letters at all. She corrects students who fail to capitalize “I” or “Catholic," but also questions the necessity because she understands their intent.Ms. Genaro has her students write about rules that they think should be abandoned and why.“They are very compelling," she said.In the era of texting, some teachers feel hesitant in ().

Passage 2Whether in public or private schools, teachers worried that their students with poor writing skills will suffer in college and the workplace. Some felt torn between their desire to enforce the rules and their fear of sucking the joy out of self-expression. And many were uncertain about how to help teenagers who didn't learn the foundations of grammar.Eighteen teachers met for a class last week with Mary Norris, a veteran copy editor at The New Yorker. The Academy for Teachers sponsored the class in the Manhattan offices of Scholastic, a publishing company.Ms. Norris began with a lighthearted demonstration of her perfectionism. Then she led the group in fixing mistakes she found in the media. Pointing to one example, she stressed that to put a comma between a subject and verb is a great error.Catherine Conley, a teacher at St.Jean Baptiste High School, said that is“something my students love to do.As the day went on, teachers expressed more concerns. They said formal grammar lessons have fallen by the wayside because of time constraints, an emphasis on hands-on projects and other priorities. Schools focus on reading comprehension and material emphasized on state tests, they said.Erika Stark, who teaches English at Bronxdale High School, said her supervisors want her to concentrate on meaning and analysis, not grammar, but she couldn't ignore her 10th-graders' mistakes.Several teachers said they struggle to deal with how much to be purists about spelling and punctuation (标点) in the era of texting. Their students often use abbreviations (缩写) in homework, such as “u” for “you," and some see a period as a sign of aggression.Ambar Paulino, an English teacher at DeWitt Clinton High School, said some of her students use slang such as “ain't” and neglect subject-verb agreement when they speak. They don't realize they need to be more formal in academic writing. “T'm trying to find a balance so I'm alowving my students to find their voice but still follow some of the rules," she said.Teresa Genaro, who teaches literature at the Packer Collegiate Institute, said she could envisage a day when writers no longer use capital letters at all. She corrects students who fail to capitalize “I” or “Catholic," but also questions the necessity because she understands their intent.Ms. Genaro has her students write about rules that they think should be abandoned and why.“They are very compelling," she said.What do we know about Teresa Genaro's students?