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 10 (8):45-54 (2010)
Research involving human subjects is much more stringently regulated than many other nonresearch activities that appear to be at least as risky. A number of prominent figures now argue that research is overregulated. We argue that the reasons typically offered to justify the present system of research regulation fail to show that research should be subject to more stringent regulation than other equally risky activities. However, there are three often overlooked reasons for thinking that research should be treated as a special case. First, research typically involves the imposition of risk on people who do not benefit from this risk imposition. Second, research depends on public trust. Third, the complexity of the moral decision making required favors ethics committees as a regulative solution for 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
Paul S. Appelbaum, Loren H. Roth, Charles W. Lidz, Paul Benson & William Winslade (1987). False Hopes and Best Data: Consent to Research and the Therapeutic Misconception. Hastings Center Report 17 (2):20-24.
Martin Wilkinson & Andrew Moore (1997). Inducement in Research. Bioethics 11 (5):373-389.
Richard Ashcroft (2008). Fair Process and the Redundancy of Bioethics: A Polemic. Public Health Ethics 1 (1):3-9.
Nafsika Athanassoulis & James Wilson (2009). When is Deception in Research Ethical? Clinical Ethics 4 (1):44-49.
D. Hunter (2007). Proportional Ethical Review and the Identification of Ethical Issues. Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (4):241-245.
Citations of this work BETA
Abraham Schwab (2010). The Recipe for Overreaching Regulation. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (8):55-56.
Nancy Nyquist Potter (2010). Civic Trust, Scientific Objectivity, and the Publicity Condition. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (8):57-58.
Stephen John (2010). Three Worries About Three Arguments for Research Exceptionalism. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (8):67-69.
Barton Moffatt (2010). Not All Human Subjects Research Is Exceptional. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (8):62-63.
Sven Ove Hansson (2010). Reversing “Research Exceptionalism”. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (8):66-67.
Similar books and articles
Adil E. Shamoo (2009). Responsible Conduct of Research. Oxford University Press.
Eric Chwang (2010). Against Risk-Benefit Review of Prisoner Research. Bioethics 24 (1):14-22.
Janet Malek (2007). Understanding Risks and Benefits in Research on Reproductive Genetic Technologies. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 32 (4):339 – 358.
Sarah J. L. Edwards & James Wilson (2012). Hard Paternalism, Fairness and Clinical Research: Why Not? Bioethics 26 (2):68 - 75.
Sarah J. L. Edwards & James Wilson (2012). Hard Paternalism, Fairness and Clinical Research: Why Not? Bioethics 26 (2):68-75.
Andrew D. McRae & Charles Weijer, Lessons From Everyday Lives: A Moral Justification for Acute Care Research.
David Hunter, Tis but a Scratch: The Human Tissue Act and the Use of Tissue for Research, Issues for Research Ethics Committees.
Sven Ove Hansson (2011). Do We Need a Special Ethics for Research? Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (1):21-29.
Lisa Bortolotti & Bert Heinrichs (2007). Delimiting the Concept of Research: An Ethical Perspective. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 28 (3):157-179.
David Hunter & James Wilson (2010). Research Exceptionalism. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (8):45-54.
Added to index2010-08-11
Total downloads13 ( #281,693 of 1,911,771 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #323,440 of 1,911,771 )
How can I increase my downloads?