David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
American Journal of Bioethics 5 (1):7 – 28 (2005)
Contemporary research ethics policies started with reflection on the atrocities perpetrated upoconcentration camp inmates by Nazi doctors. Apparently, as a consequence of that experience, the policies that now guide human subject research focus on the protection of human subjects by making informed consent the centerpiece of regulatory attention. I take the choice of context for policy design, the initial prioritization of informed consent, and several associated conceptual missteps, to have set research ethics off in the wrong direction. The aim of this paper is to sort out these confusions and their implications and to offer instead a straightforward framework for considering the ethical conduct of human subject research. In the course of this discussion I clarify different senses of autonomy that have been confounded and present more intelligible justifications for informed consent. I also take issue with several of the now accepted dogmas that govern research ethics. These include: the primacy of informed consent, the protection of the vulnerable, the substitution of beneficence for research's social purpose, and the introduction of an untenable distinction between innovation and research.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Inmaculada de Melo-Martín & Kristen Intemann (2011). Feminist Resources for Biomedical Research: Lessons From the HPV Vaccines. Hypatia 26 (1):79-101.
Greg Koski (2010). “Rethinking Research Ethics,” Again: Casuistry, Phronesis, and the Continuing Challenges of Human Research. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (10):37-39.
Rosamond Rhodes, Jody Azzouni, Stefan Bernard Baumrin, Keith Benkov, Martin J. Blaser, Barbara Brenner, Joseph W. Dauben, William J. Earle, Lily Frank, Nada Gligorov, Joseph Goldfarb, Kurt Hirschhorn, Rochelle Hirschhorn, Ian Holzman, Debbie Indyk & Ethylin Wang Jabs (2011). De MinimisRisk: A Proposal for a New Category of Research Risk. American Journal of Bioethics 11 (11):1-7.
M. T. Lysaught (2009). Docile Bodies: Transnational Research Ethics as Biopolitics. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 34 (4):384-408.
Heidi Malm (2009). Genetic Privacy: Might There Be a Moral Duty to Share One's Genetic Information? American Journal of Bioethics 9 (6):52-54.
Similar books and articles
Neil C. Manson (2007). Rethinking Informed Consent in Bioethics. Cambridge University Press.
Joanna Różyńska & Marek Czarkowski (2007). Emergency Research Without Consent Under Polish Law. Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (3):337-350.
James R. P. Ogloff & Randy K. Otto (1991). Are Research Participants Truly Informed? Readability of Informed Consent Forms Used in Research. Ethics and Behavior 1 (4):239 – 252.
Dave Wendler (2000). Informed Consent, Exploitation and Whether It is Possible to Conduct Human Subjects Research Without Either One. Bioethics 14 (4):310–339.
Alan Wertheimer (2010). Rethinking the Ethics of Clinical Research: Widening the Lens. Oxford University Press.
Janet L. Brody, John P. Cluck & Alfredo S. Aragon (1997). Participants' Understanding of the Process of Psychological Research: Informed Consent. Ethics and Behavior 7 (4):285 – 298.
Jill A. Fisher (2006). Procedural Misconceptions and Informed Consent: Insights From Empirical Research on the Clinical Trials Industry. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 16 (3):251-268.
Michelle H. Biros (2007). Research Without Consent: Exception From and Waiver of Informed Consent in Resuscitation Research. Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (3):361-369.
Rachel E. Dew (2007). Informed Consent for Research in Borderline Personality Disorder. BMC Medical Ethics 8 (1):1-4.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads20 ( #71,683 of 1,088,782 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,666 of 1,088,782 )
How can I increase my downloads?