David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
American Journal of Bioethics 4 (1):25 – 31 (2004)
There is consensus that children have questionable decisional capacity and, therefore, in general a parent or a guardian must give permission to enroll a child in a research study. Moreover, freedom from duress and coercion, the cardinal rule in research involving adults, is even more important for children. This principle is embodied prominently in the Nuremberg Code (1947) and is embodied in various federal human research protection regulations. In a program named "SATURN" (Student Athletic Testing Using Random Notification), each school in the Oregon public-school system may implement a mandatory drug-testing program for high school student athletes. A prospective study to identify drug use among student-athletes, SATURN is designed both to evaluate the influence of random drug testing and to validate the survey data through identification of individuals who do not report drug use. The enrollment of students in the drug-testing study is a requirement for playing a school sport. In addition to the coercive nature of this study design, there were ethically questionable practices in recruitment, informed consent, and confidentiality. This article concerns the question of whether research can be conducted with high school students in conjunction with a mandatory drug-testing program, while adhering to prevailing ethical standards regarding human-subjects research and specifically the participation of children in research.
|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
Sara R. Jordan & Phillip W. Gray (2012). Responsible Conduct of Research Training and Trust Between Research Postgraduate Students and Supervisors. Ethics and Behavior 22 (4):297 - 314.
Similar books and articles
Donald Louria (2004). Mandatory Drug Testing of High School Athletes: Unethical Evaluation, Unethical Policy. American Journal of Bioethics 4 (1):35-36.
Hugh LaFollette (1994). Mandatory Drug Testing. In S. Luper & C. Brown (eds.), Drugs, Morality, and the Law. Garland
Greg Koski (2004). Drug-Testing Research in High School Students: Is There a Will or a Way? American Journal of Bioethics 4 (1):33-35.
Anjuli C. Verma (2004). Criticisms of SATURN Mirror Criticisms of Any Mandatory Student Drug-Testing Policy. American Journal of Bioethics 4 (1):52-53.
Hugh LaFollette (1994). Mandatory Drug Testing. In Steven Luper & C. Brown (eds.), Drugs, Morality, and the Law. Garland
Michael Cranford (1998). Drug Testing and the Right to Privacy: Arguing the Ethics of Workplace Drug Testing. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 17 (16):1805-1815.
Nicholas J. Caste (1992). Drug Testing and Productivity. Journal of Business Ethics 11 (4):301 - 306.
Jennifer Moore (1989). Drug Testing and Corporate Responsibility: The “Ought Implies Can” Argument. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 8 (4):279 - 287.
Adil E. Shamoo & Jonathan D. Moreno (2004). A Response to Commentators on "Ethics of Research Involving Mandatory Drug Testing of High School Athletes in Oregon". American Journal of Bioethics 4 (1):29 – 30.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #193,476 of 1,789,825 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #420,681 of 1,789,825 )
How can I increase my downloads?