David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
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)|
|Through your library||Configure|
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.
A. Arshad & P. D. Arkwright (2008). Status of Healthcare Studies Submitted to UK Research Ethics Committees for Approval in 2004-. Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (5):393-395.
Richard Ashcroft (2008). Fair Process and the Redundancy of Bioethics: A Polemic. Public Health Ethics 1 (1):3-9.
Richard Ashcroft (2003). The Ethics and Governance of Medical Research: What Does Regulation Have to Do with Morality? New Review of Bioethics 1 (1):41-58.
Richard E. Ashcroft (2001). Money, Consent, and Exploitation in Research. American Journal of Bioethics 1 (2):62-63.
Citations of this work BETA
Nancy Nyquist Potter (2010). Civic Trust, Scientific Objectivity, and the Publicity Condition. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (8):57-58.
David Hunter (2012). Why Even Inappropriate Parental Consent Might Be Enough to Justify Minimal Risk Pediatric Research Without Clinical Benefit. American Journal of Bioethics 12 (1):35 - 36.
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.
Sally Bean (2010). Beyond Research Exceptionalism: A Call for Process Redesign. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (8):58-60.
Similar books and articles
Adil E. Shamoo (2009). Responsible Conduct of Research. Oxford University Press.
Lisa Bortolotti & Bert Heinrichs (2007). Delimiting the Concept of Research: An Ethical Perspective. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 28 (3):157-179.
Sven Ove Hansson (2011). Do We Need a Special Ethics for Research? Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (1):21-29.
David Hunter, Tis but a Scratch: The Human Tissue Act and the Use of Tissue for Research, Issues for Research Ethics Committees.
Andrew D. McRae & Charles Weijer, Lessons From Everyday Lives: A Moral Justification for Acute Care Research.
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.
Janet Malek (2007). Understanding Risks and Benefits in Research on Reproductive Genetic Technologies. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 32 (4):339 – 358.
Eric Chwang (2010). Against Risk-Benefit Review of Prisoner Research. Bioethics 24 (1):14-22.
David Hunter & James Wilson (2010). Research Exceptionalism. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (8):45-54.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2010-08-11
Total downloads4 ( #198,579 of 1,088,905 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?