Developing World Bioethics 11 (2):75-81 (2011)
|Abstract||Debates about justice in international clinical research problematically conflate two quite different forms of obligation. International research ethics guidelines were intended to describe how to conduct biomedical research in a just manner at the micro or clinical level (within the researcher-participant interaction) but have come to include requirements that are clearly intended to promote justice at the global level. Ethicists have also made a variety of claims regarding what international research should contribute to global justice. This paper argues that the conflation of debates about justice at the micro and macro-levels has not only resulted in the placement of obligations upon the wrong actors but has also served to exclude relevant actors from the ethical picture. Suggestions for who should properly bear macro-level obligations of justice in international clinical research are offered. The paper further contends that, unlike researchers who violate informed consent requirements, no similar type of accountability exists for obligations of global justice, even for those obligation-bearers (incorrectly) identified by current ethics guidelines|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Bridget Pratt & Bebe Loff (2013). A Framework to Link International Clinical Research to the Promotion of Justice in Global Health. Bioethics 27 (3).
Bridget Pratt & Bebe Loff (2013). Linking International Research to Global Health Equity: The Limited Contribution of Bioethics. Bioethics 27 (4):208-214.
Bridget Pratt, Deborah Zion & Bebe Loff (2012). Evaluating the Capacity of Theories of Justice to Serve as a Justice Framework for International Clinical Research. American Journal of Bioethics 12 (11):30-41.
Charles Weijer (1999). Selecting Subjects for Participation in Clinical Research: One Sphere of Justice. Journal of Medical Ethics 25 (1):31-36.
Alex John London (2005). Justice and the Human Development Approach to International Research. Hastings Center Report 35 (1):24-37.
Marcus Arvan (2012). Reconceptualizing Human Rights. Journal of Global Ethics 8 (1):1-15.
Roger Stanev (2012). Review of The Oxford Textbook of Clinical Research Ethics, by D. Wendler, C. Grady, R. Crouch, R. Lie, F. Miller, and E. Emanuel. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 33 (3):221-226.
Douglas Mackay (forthcoming). Standard of Care, Professional Obligations, and Distributive Justice. Bioethics.
Marcus Arvan (2012). Reconceptualizing Human Rights. Journal of Global Ethics 8 (1):91-105.
Ghiath Alahmad, Mohammad Al-Jumah & Kris Dierickx (2012). Review of National Research Ethics Regulations and Guidelines in Middle Eastern Arab Countries. [REVIEW] BMC Medical Ethics 13 (1):34-.
Frederick Ochieng'-odhiambo (2005). International Justice and Individual Self-Preservation. Journal of Global Ethics 1 (2):99 – 112.
Ezekiel J. Emanuel (ed.) (2003). Ethical and Regulatory Aspects of Clinical Research: Readings and Commentary. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Geoffrey Lairumbi, Michael Parker, Raymond Fitzpatrick & Michael English (2012). Forms of Benefit Sharing in Global Health Research Undertaken in Resource Poor Settings: A Qualitative Study of Stakeholders' Views in Kenya. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 7 (1):1-8.
Juhana E. Idänpään-Heikkilä & Sev Fluss (2004). The CIOMS View on the Use of Placebo in Clinical Trials. Science and Engineering Ethics 10 (1).
Jonathan Wolff (2009). Global Justice and Norms of Co-Operation: The 'Layers of Justice' View. In Stephen De Wijze, Matthew H. Kramer & Ian Carter (eds.), Hillel Steiner and the Anatomy of Justice: Themes and Challenges. Routledge.
Added to index2010-12-01
Total downloads9 ( #114,014 of 549,065 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,185 of 549,065 )
How can I increase my downloads?