Harms and deprivation of benefits for nonhuman primates in research
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 35 (2):143-156 (2014)
Abstract
The risks of harm to nonhuman primates, and the absence of benefits for them, are critically important to decisions about nonhuman primate research. Current guidelines for review and practice tend to be permissive for nonhuman primate research as long as minimal welfare requirements are fulfilled and human medical advances are anticipated. This situation is substantially different from human research, in which risks of harms to the individual subject are typically reduced to the extent feasible. A risk threshold is needed for the justification of research on nonhuman primates, comparable to the way risk thresholds are set for vulnerable human subjects who cannot provide informed consent. Much of the laboratory research conducted today has inadequate standards, leading to common physical, psychological, and social harms.DOI
10.1007/s11017-014-9288-2
My notes
Similar books and articles
Should protections for research with humans who cannot consent apply to research with nonhuman primates?David Wendler - 2014 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 35 (2):157-173.
Confronting ethical permissibility in animal research: rejecting a common assumption and extending a principle of justice.Chong Un Choe Smith - 2014 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 35 (2):175-185.
Understanding risks and benefits in research on reproductive genetic technologies.Janet Malek - 2007 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 32 (4):339 – 358.
Moving beyond the welfare standard of psychological well-being for nonhuman primates: the case of chimpanzees.John P. Gluck - 2014 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 35 (2):105-116.
Rethinking the ethics of research involving nonhuman animals: introduction.Tom L. Beauchamp, Hope R. Ferdowsian & John P. Gluck - 2014 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 35 (2):91-96.
Non-human primates: the appropriate subjects of biomedical research?M. Quigley - 2007 - Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (11):655-658.
Making Risk-Benefit Assessments of Medical Research Protocols.Alex Rajczi - 2004 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 32 (2):338-348.
Vulnerable Subjects? The Case of Nonhuman Animals in Experimentation.Jane Johnson - 2013 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 10 (4):497-504.
Maternal encouragement in nonhuman primates and the question of animal teaching.Dario Maestripieri - 1995 - Human Nature 6 (4):361-378.
The harm-benefit tradeoff in "bad deal" trials.Gillian Nycum & Lynette Reid - 2007 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 17 (4):321-350.
Primate cognitive neuroscience: What are the useful questions?A. Parker - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):128-128.
A compassionate autonomy alternative to speciesism.Constance K. Perry - 2001 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 22 (3):237-246.
Analytics
Added to PP
2014-03-14
Downloads
50 (#237,086)
6 months
1 (#454,876)
2014-03-14
Downloads
50 (#237,086)
6 months
1 (#454,876)
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Animal Research that Respects Animal Rights: Extending Requirements for Research with Humans to Animals.Angela K. Martin - 2022 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 31 (1):59-72.
A Belmont Report for Animals?—Erratum.Hope Ferdowsian, L. Syd M. Johnson, Jane Johnson, Andrew Fenton, Adam Shriver & John Gluck - 2020 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 29 (1):19-37.
The Emergence and Development of Animal Research Ethics: A Review with a Focus on Nonhuman Primates.Gardar Arnason - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (4):2277-2293.
The Road Not Mapped: The Neuroethics Roadmap on Research with Nonhuman Primates.L. Syd M. Johnson - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 11 (3):176-183.
Rethinking the ethics of research involving nonhuman animals: introduction.Tom L. Beauchamp, Hope R. Ferdowsian & John P. Gluck - 2014 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 35 (2):91-96.
References found in this work
What is it Like to be a Bat?Thomas Nagel - 2003 - In John Heil (ed.), Philosophy of Mind: A Guide and Anthology. Oxford University Press.
Why bioethics needs a concept of vulnerability.Wendy Rogers, Catriona Mackenzie & Susan Dodds - 2012 - International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 5 (2):11-38.
The regulation of animal research and the emergence of animal ethics: A conceptual history. [REVIEW]Bernard E. Rollin - 2006 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (4):285-304.