Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 24 (5):381-393 (2003)
|Abstract||In his paper, “The Relevance of Rawls’ Principle of Justice for Research on Cognitively Impaired Patients” (Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 23 (2002):45–53), Giovanni Maio has developed a thought-provoking argument for the permissibility of non-therapeutic research on cognitively impaired patients. Maio argues that his conclusion follows from the acceptance of John Rawls’s principles of justice, specifically, Rawls’s “liberty principle” Maio has misinterpreted Rawls’s “libertyprinciple” – correctly interpreted it does notsupport non-therapeutic research on cognitivelyimpaired patients. Three other ‘Rawlsian’ arguments are suggested by Maio’s discussion –two “self-respect” arguments and a “presumed consent” argument – but none of them are convincing. However, an alternative argument developed from Rawls’s discussion of “justice in health care” in his most recent book, Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, may justify certain kinds of non-therapeutic research on some cognitively impaired patients in special circumstances. We should not expect anything more permissive from a liberal theory of justice.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Roberto Alejandro (1998). The Limits of Rawlsian Justice. Johns Hopkins University Press.
John C. Moskop (1983). Rawlsian Justice and a Human Right to Health Care. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 8 (4):329-338.
Hennie Lötter (1999). Rawls, Young, and the Scope of Justice. Theoria 46 (94):90-107.
Nir Eyal (2005). ‘Perhaps the Most Important Primary Good’: Self-Respect and Rawls’s Principles of Justice. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 4 (2):195-219.
Andrew Williams (2008). Justice, Incentives and Constructivism. Ratio 21 (4):476-493.
Ivar Labukt (2009). Rawls on the Practicability of Utilitarianism. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 8 (2):201-221.
Fabienne Peter (2009). Rawlsian Justice. In Paul Anand, Prastanta Pattanaik & Clemens Puppe (eds.), The Handbook of Rational and Social Choice.
Larry A. Alexander (1985). Fair Equality of Opportunity. Philosophy Research Archives 11:197-208.
Giovanni Maio (2003). Research Ethics and the Principle of Justice as Fairness – a Restatement. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 24 (5):395-406.
PD Dr Giovanni Maio (2002). The Relevance of Rawls' Principle of Justice for Research on Cognitively Impaired Patients. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 23 (1):45-53.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads8 ( #131,679 of 722,783 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?