Reconsidering paternalism in clinical research

The ethical standards that regulate clinical research have multiple rationales. Among them is the need to protect potential subjects from making imprudent decisions, which extends beyond the soft paternalistic concern to protect people from making uninformed decisions to participate in trials. This...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Authors: Jansen, Lynn A. (Author) ; Wall, Steven (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Wiley-Blackwell [2018]
In: Bioethics
Year: 2018, Volume: 32, Issue: 1, Pages: 50-58
IxTheo Classification:NCH Medical ethics
NCJ Ethics of science
Further subjects:B Ethics
B Informed Consent
B Paternalism
B research on human subjects
B Fair play
Online Access: Volltext (Verlag)
Volltext (doi)
Description
Summary:The ethical standards that regulate clinical research have multiple rationales. Among them is the need to protect potential subjects from making imprudent decisions, which extends beyond the soft paternalistic concern to protect people from making uninformed decisions to participate in trials. This article argues that a plausible risk/benefit restriction on clinical trials is presumptively justified by hard paternalism, which in turn is supported by a deeper fairness-based rationale. This presumptive case for hard paternalism in research is not defeated by the alleged right to participate in clinical trials, by concerns about insult or status, by the need to conduct early phase trials that promise little to no benefit to participants, or by the recognition that some potential subjects are altruistically motivated.
ISSN:1467-8519
Contains:Enthalten in: Bioethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1111/bioe.12382