Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Serial Participation and the Ethics of Phase 1 Healthy Volunteer Research.Rebecca L. Walker, Marci D. Cottingham & Jill A. Fisher - 2018 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 43 (1):83-114.
    Phase 1 healthy volunteer clinical trials—which financially compensate subjects in tests of drug toxicity levels and side effects—appear to place pressure on each joint of the moral framework justifying research. In this article, we review concerns about phase 1 trials as they have been framed in the bioethics literature, including undue inducement and coercion, unjust exploitation, and worries about compromised data validity. We then revisit these concerns in light of the lived experiences of serial participants who are income-dependent on phase (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Vulnerable populations in research: The case of the seriously ill.Philip J. Nickel - 2006 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (3):245-264.
    This paper advances a new criterion of a vulnerable population in research. According to this criterion, there are consent-based and fairness-based reasons for calling a group vulnerable. The criterion is then applied to the case of people with serious illnesses. It is argued that people with serious illnesses meet this criterion for reasons related to consent. Seriously ill people have a susceptibility to “enticing offers” that hold out the prospect of removing or alleviating illness, and this susceptibility reduces their ability (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  • The battering of informed consent.M. Kottow - 2004 - Journal of Medical Ethics 30 (6):565-569.
    Autonomy has been hailed as the foremost principle of bioethics, and yet patients’ decisions and research subjects’ voluntary participation are being subjected to frequent restrictions. It has been argued that patient care is best served by a limited form of paternalism because the doctor is better qualified to take critical decisions than the patient, who is distracted by illness. The revival of paternalism is unwarranted on two grounds: firstly, because prejudging that the sick are not fully autonomous is a biased (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Introduction: Vulnerability in Biomedical Research.Ana S. Iltis - 2009 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 37 (1):6-11.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Introduction: Vulnerability in Biomedical Research.Ana S. Iltis - 2009 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 37 (1):6-11.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Payments to Normal Healthy Volunteers in Phase 1 Trials: Avoiding Undue Influence While Distributing Fairly the Burdens of Research Participation.A. S. Iltis - 2009 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 34 (1):68-90.
    Clinical investigators must engage in just subject recruitment and selection and avoid unduly influencing research participation. There may be tension between the practice of keeping payments to participants low to avoid undue influence and the requirements of justice when recruiting normal healthy volunteers for phase 1 drug studies. By intentionally keeping payments low to avoid unduly influenced participation, investigators, on the recommendation or insistence of institutional review boards, may be targeting or systematically recruiting healthy adult members of lower socio-economic groups (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Rethinking the ethics of incentives.Ruth W. Grant - 2015 - Journal of Economic Methodology 22 (3):354-372.
    Incentives are typically conceived as a form of trade, and so voluntariness appears to be the only ethical concern. As a consequence, incentives are often considered ethically superior to regulations because they are voluntary rather than coercive. But incentives can also be viewed as one way to get others to do what they otherwise would not; that is, as a form of power. When incentives are viewed in this light, many ethical questions arise in addition to voluntariness: What are the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • The Reluctant Mercenary: Vulnerability and the 'Whores of War'.Ben Fraser - 2013 - Journal of Military Ethics 12 (3):235-251.
    Mercenaries are the target of moral condemnation far more often than they are subject of moral concern. One attempt at morally condemning mercenaries proceeds by analogy with prostitutes; mercenaries are ?the whores of war?. This analogy is unconvincing as a way of condemning mercenaries. However, careful comparison of mercenarism and prostitution suggests that, like many prostitutes, some mercenaries may be vulnerable individuals. If apt, this comparison imposes a consistency requirement: if one thinks certain prostitutes are appropriate subjects of moral concern (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • A Considerably Common Morality: Catholic Ethics and Secular Principlism in Dialogue.John J. Fitzgerald - 2019 - Christian Bioethics 25 (1):86-127.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Bioethics of Business: Rethinking the Relationship between Bioethics Consultants and Corporate Clients.Raymond G. de Vries & Charles L. Bosk - 2004 - Hastings Center Report 34 (5):28-32.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Does Money Make Bioethics go 'Round?Raymond G. De Vries & Carla C. Keirns - 2008 - American Journal of Bioethics 8 (8):65-67.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • CQ Sources/Bibliography.Bette Anton - 1999 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 8 (4):348-350.
    These CQ Sources were compiled by Bette Anton.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • CQ Sources/Bibliography.Bette Anton - 2009 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 18 (2):155-158.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark