Authors
Ben Sachs
University of St. Andrews
Abstract
This article concerns the validity of six canonical rules that institutional review boards use to constrain the behavior of investigators. These rules require investigators to design their studies in a scientifically valid way, not pay their subjects to take risks, minimize risks to their subjects, secure for their subjects access to effective interventions post-trial, not pay their subjects too much and allow their subjects to withdraw from the study unconditionally. Enforcement of these rules is problematic because there are other relationships that seem to be like the investigator-subject relationship in all ethically relevant respects, such as the employer-employee and volunteer organizer-volunteer relationships, to which we would not dream of applying these same rules. Applying these rules in one context but not the others is a violation of ethical consistency I label “exceptionalism.” We should conclude that it is time to reexamine the validity of the six rules
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/jmp/jhp055
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 60,920
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Undue Inducement: Nonsense on Stilts?Ezekiel J. Emanuel - 2005 - American Journal of Bioethics 5 (5):9-13.
The Research Subject as Wage Earner.James A. Anderson & Charles Weijer - 2002 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 23 (4-5):359-376.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

A Framework for Risk-Benefit Evaluations in Biomedical Research.Wendler Annette Rid David - 2011 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 21 (2):141-179.
What We Worry About When We Worry About the Ethics of Clinical Research.David Wendler - 2011 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 32 (3):161-180.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Clinician-Investigator: Unavoidable but Manageable Tension.Howard Brody & Franklin G. Miller - 2003 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 13 (4):329-346.
New Rules for Research with Human Participants?Jessica Berg & Nicole Deming - 2011 - Hastings Center Report 41 (6):10-11.
The Inalienable Right to Withdraw From Research.Terrance McConnell - 2010 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 38 (4):840-846.
Ethics in Human Subjects Research: Do Incentives Matter?Ruth W. Grant & Jeremy Sugarman - 2004 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 29 (6):717 – 738.
The Clinical Investigator-Subject Relationship: A Contextual Approach.David B. Resnik - 2009 - Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 4:16-.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-09-14

Total views
17 ( #603,933 of 2,439,286 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #434,168 of 2,439,286 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes