28 found
Sort by:
  1. A. Barnhill & F. G. Miller (forthcoming). Placebo and Deception: A Commentary. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy:jhu043.
    In a recent article in this Journal, Shlomo Cohen and Haim Shapiro introduce the concept of “comparable placebo treatments” —placebo treatments with biological effects similar to the drugs they replace—and argue that doctors are not being deceptive when they prescribe or administer CPTs without revealing that they are placebos. We critique two of Cohen and Shapiro’s primary arguments. First, Cohen and Shapiro argue that offering undisclosed placebos is not lying to the patient, but rather is making a self-fulfilling prophecy—telling a (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. E. A. Largent, F. G. Miller & S. Joffe (forthcoming). A Prescription for Ethical Learning. Commentary. Hastings Center Report.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. F. G. Miller, J. J. Fins & J. Illes (forthcoming). Protecting Human Subjects in Brain Research: A Pragmatic Perspective. Neuroethics. Defining the Issues in Theory, Practice and Policy.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. A. Wertheimer & F. G. Miller (forthcoming). There Are (STILL) No Coercive Offers. Journal of Medical Ethics:2013-101510.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. R. L. Brim & F. G. Miller (2013). The Potential Benefit of the Placebo Effect in Sham-Controlled Trials: Implications for Risk-Benefit Assessments and Informed Consent. Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (11):703-707.
    Next SectionThere has been considerable debate surrounding the ethics of sham-controlled trials of procedures and interventions. Critics argue that these trials are unethical because participants assigned to the control group have no prospect of benefit from the trial, yet they are exposed to all the risks of the sham intervention. However, the placebo effect associated with sham procedures can often be substantial and has been well documented in the scientific literature. We argue that, in light of the scientific evidence supporting (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. F. G. Miller & S. Joffe (2013). Phase 1 Oncology Trials and Informed Consent. Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (12):761-764.
    Ethical concerns have been raised about the quality of informed consent by participants in phase 1 oncology trials. Interview surveys indicate that substantial proportions of trial participants do not understand the purpose of these trials—evaluating toxicity and dosing for subsequent efficacy studies—and overestimate the prospect of therapeutic benefit that they offer. In this article we argue that although these data suggest the desirability of enhancing the process of information disclosure and assessment of comprehension of the implications of study participation, they (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. W. Sinnott-Armstrong & F. G. Miller (2013). Killing Versus Totally Disabling: A Reply to Critics. Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (1):12-14.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. W. Sinnott-Armstrong & F. G. Miller (2013). What Makes Killing Wrong? Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (1):3-7.
    What makes an act of killing morally wrong is not that the act causes loss of life or consciousness but rather that the act causes loss of all remaining abilities. This account implies that it is not even pro tanto morally wrong to kill patients who are universally and irreversibly disabled, because they have no abilities to lose. Applied to vital organ transplantation, this account undermines the dead donor rule and shows how current practices are compatible with morality.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. F. G. Miller (2012). Research and Complicity: The Case of Julius Hallervorden. Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (1):53-56.
    The charge of complicity has been raised in debates over the ethics of fetal tissue transplantation and embryonic stem cell research. However, the applicability of the concept of complicity to these types of research is neither clear nor uncontroversial. This article discusses the historical case of Julius Hallervorden, a distinguished German neuropathologist who conducted research on brains of mentally handicapped patients killed in the context of the Nazi ‘euthanasia’ programme. It is argued that this case constitutes a paradigm of complicity (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. H. Brody, D. Buchanan & F. G. Miller (2011). Misunderstanding, Period. Irb 33 (5):6.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. E. A. Largent, C. Grady, F. G. Miller & A. Wertheimer (2011). Money, Coercion, and Undue Inducement: Attitudes About Payments to Research Participants. Irb 34 (1):1-8.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. F. G. Miller & H. Brody (2011). Understanding and Harnessing Placebo Effects: Clearing Away the Underbrush. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 36 (1):69-78.
    Despite strong growth in scientific investigation of the placebo effect, understanding of this phenomenon remains deeply confused. We investigate critically seven common conceptual distinctions that impede clear understanding of the placebo effect: (1) verum/placebo, (2) active/inactive, (3) signal/noise, (4) specific/nonspecific, (5) objective/subjective, (6) disease/illness, and (7) intervention/context. We argue that some of these should be eliminated entirely, whereas others must be used with caution to avoid bias. Clearing away the conceptual underbrush is needed to lay down a path to understanding (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. S. K. Shah, R. D. Truog & F. G. Miller (2011). Death and Legal Fictions. Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (12):719-722.
    Advances in life-saving technologies in the past few decades have challenged our traditional understandings of death. Traditionally, death was understood to occur when a person stops breathing, their heart stops beating and they are cold to the touch. Today, physicians determine death by relying on a diagnosis of ‘total brain failure’ or by waiting a short while after circulation stops. Evidence has emerged, however, that the conceptual bases for these approaches to determining death are fundamentally flawed and depart substantially from (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. F. G. Miller & R. D. Truog (2010). Decapitation and the Definition of Death. Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (10):632-634.
    Although established in the law and current practice, the determination of death according to neurological criteria continues to be controversial. Some scholars have advocated return to the traditional circulatory and respiratory criteria for determining death because individuals diagnosed as ‘brain dead’ display an extensive range of integrated biological functioning with the aid of mechanical ventilation. Others have attempted to refute this stance by appealing to the analogy between decapitation and brain death. Since a decapitated animal is obviously dead, and ‘brain (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. F. G. Miller, R. D. Truog & D. W. Brock (2010). The Dead Donor Rule: Can It Withstand Critical Scrutiny? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 35 (3):299-312.
    Transplantation of vital organs has been premised ethically and legally on "the dead donor rule" (DDR)—the requirement that donors are determined to be dead before these organs are procured. Nevertheless, scholars have argued cogently that donors of vital organs, including those diagnosed as "brain dead" and those declared dead according to cardiopulmonary criteria, are not in fact dead at the time that vital organs are being procured. In this article, we challenge the normative rationale for the DDR by rejecting the (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. F. G. Miller (2009). Death and Organ Donation: Back to the Future. Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (10):616-620.
    The practice of transplantation of vital organs from “brain-dead” donors is in a state of theoretical disarray. Although the law and prevailing medical ethics treat patients diagnosed as having irreversible total brain failure as dead, scholars have increasingly challenged the established rationale for regarding these patients as dead. To understand the ethical situation that we now face, it is helpful to revisit the writings of the philosopher Hans Jonas, who forcefully challenged the emerging effort to redefine death in the late (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. F. G. Miller & S. Joffe (2009). Limits to Research Risks. Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (7):445-449.
    Risk–benefit assessment is a routine requirement for research ethics committees that review and oversee biomedical research with human subjects. Nevertheless, it remains unclear how to weigh and balance risks to research participants against the social benefits that flow from generating biomedical knowledge. In this article, we address the question of whether there are any reasonable criteria for defining the limit of permissible risks to individuals who provide informed consent for research participation. We argue against any a priori limit to permissible (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. F. G. Miller & D. Wendler (2008). Is It Ethical to Keep Interim Findings of Randomised Controlled Trials Confidential? Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (3):198-201.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. D. I. Shalowitz & F. G. Miller (2008). The Search for Clarity in Communicating Research Results to Study Participants. Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (9):e17-e17.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. A. Wertheimer & F. G. Miller (2008). Payment for Research Participation: A Coercive Offer? Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (5):389-392.
    Payment for research participation has raised ethical concerns, especially with respect to its potential for coercion. We argue that characterising payment for research participation as coercive is misguided, because offers of benefit cannot constitute coercion. In this article we analyse the concept of coercion, refute mistaken conceptions of coercion and explain why the offer of payment for research participation is never coercive but in some cases may produce undue inducement.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. F. G. Miller & T. J. Kaptchuk (2007). Acupuncture Trials and Informed Consent. Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (1):43-44.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. D. Wendler & F. G. Miller (2007). Assessing Research Risks Systematically: The Net Risks Test. Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (8):481-486.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. D. R. Buchanan & F. G. Miller (2006). A Public Health Perspective on Research Ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 32 (12):729-733.
    Ethical guidelines for conducting clinical trials have historically been based on a perceived therapeutic obligation to treat and benefit the patient-participants. The origins of this ethical framework can be traced to the Hippocratic oath originally written to guide doctors in caring for their patients, where the overriding moral obligation of doctors is strictly to do what is best for the individual patient, irrespective of other social considerations. In contrast, although medicine focuses on the health of the person, public health is (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. F. G. Miller & J. D. Moreno (2005). The State of Research Ethics: A Tribute to John C. Fletcher. Journal of Clinical Ethics 16 (4):355.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. F. G. Miller & H. Brody (2003). Clinical Equipoise and the Therapeutic Misconception-Miller and Brody Reply. Hastings Center Report 33 (5):7-7.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. F. G. Miller (1992). Euthanasia: Still Open for Debate. Journal of Clinical Ethics 3 (3):247.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. F. G. Miller (1990). Ethics is Everybody's Concern. Journal of Clinical Ethics 1 (4):326.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. F. G. Miller (1990). Importance of Understanding Suffering for Clinical Ethics. Journal of Clinical Ethics 2 (4):290-291.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation