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...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jansen, Lynn A. (Autor) ; Wall, Steven (Autor)
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Gargar...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell [2018]
En: Bioethics
Año: 2018, Volumen: 32, Número: 1, Páginas: 50-58
Clasificaciones IxTheo:NCH Ética de la medicina
NCJ Ética de la ciencia
Otras palabras clave:B Ethics
B Informed Consent
B Paternalism
B research on human subjects
B Justicia
Acceso en línea: Volltext (Verlag)
Volltext (doi)
Descripción
Sumario: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
Obras secundarias:Enthalten in: Bioethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1111/bioe.12382