Graduate studies at Western
Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (10):598-603 (2010)
|Abstract||This paper reflects on some amendments to the Declaration of Helsinki in 2008. It focuses on former paragraphs 5 (now 6) and 19 (now 17). Paragraph 5 suggested that the wellbeing of research participants should take precedence over the interests of science and society. Paragraph 6 now proposes that it should take precedence over all other interests. Paragraph 19, and the new paragraph 17, suggest that research involving the members of a disadvantaged population is only justified if the clinical trial is likely to benefit them. In both cases, the recommendation is that the interests of the research subjects should prevail over the interests of third parties. This paper assesses the plausibility of these statements, and in order to do so, considers debates on the moral duty to participate in biomedical research. It is argued that, even if seen in the context of the Declaration as a whole, the statements contained in these paragraphs risk offering a misleading portrait of science and risk eroding some of the ethical principles that should form the basis of a satisfactory shared life, such as altruism and responsibility for our fellows|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Annette Rid & Harald Schmidt (2010). The 2008 Declaration of Helsinki - First Among Equals in Research Ethics? Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 38 (1):143-148.
Ruth Macklin (2001). After Helsinki: Unresolved Issues in International Research. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 11 (1):17-36.
Ignacio Mastroleo (2008). EI principio de acceso posinvestigación en la revisión 2008 de la Declaración de Helsinki. Perspectivas Bioéticas 13 (24-25):140-157.
Bozidar Vrhovac (2004). Placebo and the Helsinki Declaration — What to Do? Science and Engineering Ethics 10 (1).
W. Tadd (2000). The Helsinki Declaration: Why All the Fuss? Nursing Ethics 7 (5):439-450.
A. Belsey (1978). Patients, Doctors and Experimentation: Doubts About the Declaration of Helsinki. Journal of Medical Ethics 4 (4):182-185.
R. K. Lie (2004). The Standard of Care Debate: The Declaration of Helsinki Versus the International Consensus Opinion. Journal of Medical Ethics 30 (2):190-193.
Deborah Zion (2003). Justice as Equitable Power Relations: Beyond the "Standard of Care" Debate and the Declaration of Helsinki. American Journal of Bioethics 3 (2):34-35.
Robert S. van Howe & J. Steven Svoboda (2008). Neonatal Pain Relief and the Helsinki Declaration. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 36 (4):803-823.
Simon Woods & Pauline Mccormack (2013). Disputing the Ethics of Research: The Challenge From Bioethics and Patient Activism to the Interpretation of the Declaration of Helsinki in Clinical Trials. Bioethics 27 (5):243-250.
R. V. Carlson, N. H. van Ginneken, L. M. Pettigrew, A. Davies, K. M. Boyd & D. J. Webb (2007). The Three Official Language Versions of the Declaration of Helsinki: What's Lost in Translation? Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (9):545-548.
Marco Cosentino & Mario Picozzi (2011). The Declaration of Helsinki and Post-Study Access to Effective Drug Treatments for Subjects Participating in Clinical Trials. Bioethics 26 (7):393-394.
Randolph Smoak (2004). Placebo: Its Action and Place in Health Research Today. Science and Engineering Ethics 10 (1).
Lisa Eckenwiler, Dafna Feinholz, Carolyn Ells & Toby Schonfeld (2008). The Declaration of Helsinki Through a Feminist Lens. International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 1 (1):161 - 177.
E. D. Richter (2001). Extending the Boundaries of the Declaration of Helsinki: A Case Study of an Unethical Experiment in a Non-Medical Setting. Journal of Medical Ethics 27 (2):126-129.
Added to index2010-09-13
Total downloads5 ( #170,048 of 722,946 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,087 of 722,946 )
How can I increase my downloads?