Applying the Belmont Principles to Stakeholder-Engaged Research: Adaptions and Limitations

In Emily E. Anderson (ed.), Ethical Issues in Community and Patient Stakeholder–Engaged Health Research. Springer Verlag. pp. 247-257 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The Belmont Report’s three foundational ethical principles—respect for persons, beneficence, and justice—have shaped regulation, practice, and our collective thinking about research with human beings in the United States for over 40 years. While it has proven remarkably adaptable, Belmont’s framework is a product of a specific time and historical context. Both the research enterprise and society at large have changed in significant ways since its creation. For example, the last four decades have seen a general democratization of knowledge production, increasing skepticism of authority and expertise, and growing demands that institutions of power be more transparent about their activities so they can be better held to account. Within the research enterprise, the emergence of community engaged- and patient-centered research reflects these changes. This chapter examines the application of Belmont’s framework to stakeholder-engaged research, both illuminating its flexibilities and identifying its limitations, in terms of the values, norms, and expectations that are central to stakeholder-engaged research but unaccounted for by Belmont.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,783

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Belmont Report and Innovative Clinical Research.John D. Lantos - 2020 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 63 (2):389-400.
Belmont in Context.Will Schupmann & Jonathan D. Moreno - 2020 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 63 (2):220-239.
Introduction to the Special Issue on the Belmont Report.Franklin G. Miller & Jonathan Kimmelman - 2020 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 63 (2):219-219.
Rethinking the Belmont Report?Phoebe Friesen, Lisa Kearns, Barbara Redman & Arthur L. Caplan - 2017 - American Journal of Bioethics 17 (7):15-21.
A Belmont Report for Animals?Hope Ferdowsian, L. Syd M. Johnson, Jane Johnson, Andrew Fenton, Adam Shriver & John Gluck - 2020 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 29 (1):19-37.
Belmont in Europe: A Mostly Indirect Influence.Søren Holm - 2020 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 63 (2):262-276.
The Origins and Drafting of the Belmont Report.Tom L. Beauchamp - 2020 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 63 (2):240-250.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-09-30

Downloads
6 (#1,458,635)

6 months
4 (#783,478)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references