David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Medical Ethics 28 (1):24-27 (2002)
Clinical and research practices designed by developed countries are often implemented in host nations of the Third World. In recent years, a number of papers have presented a diversity of arguments to justify these practices which include the defence of research with placebos even though best proven treatments exist; the distribution of drugs unapproved in their country of origin; withholding of existing therapy in order to observe the natural course of infection and disease; redefinition of equipoise to a more bland version, and denial of post-trial benefits to research subjects. These practices have all been prohibited in developed, sponsoring countries, even though they invariably have pockets of poverty where conditions comparable to the Third World prevail. Furthermore, the latest update of the Declaration of Helsinki clearly decries double ethical standards in research protocols. Under these circumstances, it does not seem appropriate that First World scholars should propose and defend research and clinical practices with less stringent ethical standards than those mandatory in their own countries. Recent years have witnessed frequent reports of less stringent ethical standards being applied to both clinical and research medical practices, for the most part in the field of drug trials and drug marketing, initiated by developed countries in poorer nations. Still more unsettling, a number of articles have endorsed the policy of employing ethical norms in these host countries, which would be unacceptable to both the legislations and the moral standards of the sponsor nations. Also, these reformulations often contravene the Declaration of Helsinki or one of its updates. This paper is not so much concerned with the actual practices, which have been subjected to frequent scrutiny and publicly decried when gross misconduct occurred. Rather, my concern relates to the approval and support such practices have found in the literature on bioethics from authors who might be expected to use their energy and scholarship to explore and endorse the universalisability of ethics rather than to develop ad hoc arguments that would allow exceptions and variations from accepted moral standards. To this purpose, issue will be taken with arguments in three fields: medical and pharmaceutical practices, research strategies, and local application of research results
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
N. Sofaer & D. Strech (2011). Reasons Why Post-Trial Access to Trial Drugs Should, or Need Not Be Ensured to Research Participants: A Systematic Review. Public Health Ethics 4 (2):160-184.
Michael H. Kottow (2003). The Vulnerable and the Susceptible. Bioethics 17 (5-6):460-471.
Michael H. Kottow (2007). Should Research Ethics Triumph Over Clinical Ethics? Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 13 (4):695-698.
Anna Chiumento, Muhammad Naseem Khan, Atif Rahman & Lucy Frith (2015). Managing Ethical Challenges to Mental Health Research in Post‐Conflict Settings. Developing World Bioethics 15 (2).
Scott Mcintosh, Essie Sierra, Ann Dozier, Sergio Diaz, Zahira Quiñones, Aron Primack, Gary Chadwick & Deborah J. Ossip-klein (2008). Ethical Review Issues in Collaborative Research Between Us and Low – Middle Income Country Partners: A Case Example. Bioethics 22 (8):414-422.
Similar books and articles
D. Lamb (1999). Am I My Brother's Keeper? The Ethical Frontiers of Biomedicine. Journal of Medical Ethics 25 (3):283-283.
Donald Regan (2004). Why Am I My Brother's Keeper? In R. Jay Wallace, Samuel Scheffler & Michael Smith (eds.), Reason and Value: Themes from the Philosophy of Joseph Raz. Clarendon Press
Albert R. Spencer (2007). Am I My Brother's Keeper? Royce and Dewey on the Community's Responsibility for the Lost Individual. The Pluralist 2 (2):71 - 80.
Mark O. Hatfield (1982). America's Need for an 'Ethical Renaissance'. Journal of Business Ethics 1 (2):99 - 108.
David Thunder (2009). Am I My Brother's Keeper? Grounding and Motivating an Ethos of Social Responsibility in a Free Society. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 12 (4):559-580.
William F. Gleeson (1947). Keeper of the Keys. Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 22 (1):189-190.
Simon Beck (2013). Am I My Brother's Keeper? On Personal Identity and Responsibility. South African Journal of Philosophy 32 (1):1-9.
Joseph DesJardins (1998). Nature's Keeper. Environmental Ethics 20 (2):211-213.
Laura Newhart (2005). My Sister's Keeper. Teaching Philosophy 28 (4):382-384.
Norman Daniels (1982). Am I My Parents' Keeper? Midwest Studies in Philosophy 7 (1):517-540.
E. Schütrumpf (2008). Heraclides Ponticus, the Snake Keeper. Classical Quarterly 58 (02):673-.
Jason Lee (2012). The Zoo Keeper's Strife: Will Self's Psychiatric Fictions. Philosophy and Literature 36 (1):196-208.
Marshall B. Kapp (1985). Financing Long-Term Care for the Elderly: Am I Your Parents' Keeper? Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 13 (4):188-189.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2010-08-24
Total downloads1 ( #629,306 of 1,724,891 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?