David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Bioethics 26 (8):422-430 (2012)
This paper considers the often-expressed fear that medical research may use children merely as means, and not respect them as ends in themselves – especially insofar as they are deemed less able to consent than adults. The main focus is on large-scale genetic, socio-medical and epidemiological research. The theoretical starting point of the paper is that to be treated as an end in oneself is to be regarded as – and to act as – a participant in cooperative endeavours. This participatory status is certainly connected with individual authority to consent and dissent; and there is no doubt that consent plays an important role when adults participate in many research projects. However, insofar as consent is located within structures of human cooperation, the authority to consent is not a straightforward privilege. Rather, consent is bound up with responsibility for one's choices and commitment to shared terms of cooperation. Given this understanding, it is argued that consent should not be our principal concern when we involve children in research. This is not because of children's (possible) incompetence to consent as such, but rather because children are still learning how to respect and assess the cooperative terms involved in our institutional lives. Instead, our leading concern should be with the terms regulating their involvement in research. Given suitable safeguards, research is one way in which children may learn what it is to bear responsibilities and to act as an end in oneself – that is, to cooperate with others on reasonable terms and for worthy ends
|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
Mairi Levitt (2011). Relating to Participants: How Close Do Biobanks and Donors Really Want to Be? [REVIEW] Health Care Analysis 19 (3):220-230.
Similar books and articles
Sonja Grover (2003). On the Limits of Parental Proxy Consent: Children's Right to Non-Participation in Non-Therapeutic Research. [REVIEW] Journal of Academic Ethics 1 (4):349-383.
T. M. Wilkinson (2001). Parental Consent and the Use of Dead Children's Bodies. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 11 (4):337-358.
Victoria A. Miller, Dennis Drotar & Eric Kodish (2004). Children's Competence for Assent and Consent: A Review of Empirical Findings. [REVIEW] Ethics and Behavior 14 (3):255 – 295.
Susan E. Zinner (1995). The Elusive Goal of Informed Consent by Adolescents. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 16 (4).
Mutsawashe Bwakura-Dangarembizi, Rosemary Musesengwa, Kusum Nathoo, Patrick Takaidza, Tawanda Mhute & Tichaona Vhembo (2012). Ethical and Legal Constraints to Children's Participation in Research in Zimbabwe: Experiences From the Multicenter Pediatric Hiv Arrow Trial. BMC Medical Ethics 13 (1):17-.
Oonagh Corrigan (ed.) (2009). The Limits of Consent: A Socio-Ethical Approach to Human Subject Research in Medicine. Oxford University Press.
John Harris & Søren Holm (2003). Should We Presume Moral Turpitude in Our Children? – Small Children and Consent to Medical Research. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 24 (2):121-129.
Gordon R. Mitchell (2001). Defining the Subject of Consent in DNA Research. Journal of Medical Humanities 22 (1):41-53.
Judy Allen & Beverley Mcnamara (2011). Reconsidering the Value of Consent in Biobank Research. Bioethics 25 (3):155-166.
Tom Walker (2013). Respecting Autonomy Without Disclosing Information. Bioethics 27 (7):388-394.
Robert F. Weir & Jay R. Horton (1995). Genetic Research, Adolescents, and Informed Consent. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 16 (4).
Beverly Woodward & Dale Hammerschmidt (2003). Requiring Consent Vs. Waiving Consent for Medical Records Research: A Minnesota Law Vs. The U.S. (HIPAA) Privacy Rule. Health Care Analysis 11 (3):207-218.
Added to index2011-02-15
Total downloads14 ( #119,025 of 1,100,144 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #51,421 of 1,100,144 )
How can I increase my downloads?