Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Reframing Recruitment: Evaluating Framing in Authorization for Research Contact Programs.Candace D. Speight, Charlie Gregor, Yi-An Ko, Stephanie A. Kraft, Andrea R. Mitchell, Nyiramugisha K. Niyibizi, Bradley G. Phillips, Kathryn M. Porter, Seema K. Shah, Jeremy Sugarman, Benjamin S. Wilfond & Neal W. Dickert - 2021 - AJOB Empirical Bioethics 12 (3):206-213.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Autonomy and couples’ joint decision-making in healthcare.Pauline E. Osamor & Christine Grady - 2018 - BMC Medical Ethics 19 (1):1-8.
    Background Respect for autonomy is a key principle in bioethics. However, respecting autonomy in practice is complex because most people define themselves and make decisions influenced by a complex network of social relationships. The extent to which individual autonomy operates for each partner within the context of decision-making within marital or similar relationships is largely unexplored. This paper explores issues related to decision-making by couples for health care and the circumstances under which such a practice should be respected as compatible (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Informed Consent: What Must Be Disclosed and What Must Be Understood?Joseph Millum & Danielle Bromwich - 2021 - American Journal of Bioethics 21 (5):46-58.
    Over the last few decades, multiple studies have examined the understanding of participants in clinical research. They show variable and often poor understanding of key elements of disclosure, such as expected risks and the experimental nature of treatments. Did the participants in these studies give valid consent? According to the standard view of informed consent they did not. The standard view holds that the recipient of consent has a duty to disclose certain information to the profferer of consent because valid (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  • Designing a Just Soda Tax.Douglas MacKay & Alexandria Huber-Disla - forthcoming - Economics and Philosophy:1-21.
    Soda taxes are controversial. While proponents point to their potential health benefits and the public projects that could be funded with their revenue, critics argue that they are paternalistic and regressive. In this paper, we explore the prospects for designing a just soda tax, one that appropriately balances the often-competing ethical considerations of promoting social welfare, respecting people’s autonomy, and ensuring distributive fairness. We argue that policymakers have several paths forward for designing a just soda tax, but that the considerations (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Preventing Sin: The Ethics of Vaccines Against Smoking.Sarah R. Lieber & Joseph Millum - 2013 - Hastings Center Report 43 (3):23-33.
    Advances in immunotherapy pave the way for vaccines that target not only infections, but also unhealthy behaviors such as smoking. A nicotine vaccine that eliminates the pleasure associated with smoking could potentially be used to prevent children from adopting this addictive and dangerous behavior. This paper offers an ethical analysis of such vaccines. We argue that it would be permissible for parents to give their child a nicotine vaccine if the following conditions are met: (1) the vaccine is expected to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Promoting Research with Organ Transplant Patients.Sarah R. Lieber, Thomas D. Schiano & Rosamond Rhodes - 2018 - IRB: Ethics & Human Research 40 (5):1-10.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Freedom and Indoctrination.Michael Garnett - 2015 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 115 (2pt2):93-108.
    It has been alleged that compatibilists are committed to the view that agents act freely and responsibly even when subject to certain forms of radical manipulation. In this paper I identify and elucidate a form of compatibilist freedom, social autonomy, that is essential to understanding what is wrong with ordinary indoctrination and argue that it also holds the key to understanding what goes wrong in more fanciful manipulation cases.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Autonomy and couples’ joint decision-making in healthcare.Pauline E. Osamor & Christine Grady - 2018 - BMC Medical Ethics 19 (1):3.
    Respect for autonomy is a key principle in bioethics. However, respecting autonomy in practice is complex because most people define themselves and make decisions influenced by a complex network of social relationships. The extent to which individual autonomy operates for each partner within the context of decision-making within marital or similar relationships is largely unexplored. This paper explores issues related to decision-making by couples for health care and the circumstances under which such a practice should be respected as compatible with (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Framing Effects Do Not Undermine Consent.Samuel Director - 2024 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 27 (2):221-235.
    Suppose that a patient is receiving treatment options from her doctor. In one case, the doctor says, “the surgery has a 90% survival rate.” Now, suppose the doctor instead said, “the procedure has a 10% mortality rate.” Predictably, the patient is more likely to consent on the first description and more likely to dissent on the second. This is an example of a framing effect. A framing effect occurs when “the description of [logically-equivalent] options in terms of gains (positive frame) (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Informed Consent: What Must Be Disclosed and What Must Be Understood?”.Danielle Bromwich & Joseph Millum - 2021 - American Journal of Bioethics 21 (7):1-5.
    In “Informed Consent: What Must be Disclosed and What Must be Understood?”, we reject a dogma at the heart of research ethics. We demonstrate that the constitutive claim...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Safeguarding Users of Consumer Mental Health Apps in Research and Product Improvement Studies: an Interview Study.Kamiel Verbeke, Charu Jain, Ambra Shpendi & Pascal Borry - 2024 - Neuroethics 17 (1):1-20.
    Mental health-related data generated by app users during the routine use of Consumer Mental Health Apps (CMHAs) are being increasingly leveraged for research and product improvement studies. However, it remains unclear which ethical safeguards and practices should be implemented by researchers and app developers to protect users during these studies, and concerns have been raised over their current implementation in CMHAs. To better understand which ethical safeguards and practices are implemented, why and how, 17 app developers and researchers were interviewed (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Nudge or Grudge? Choice Architecture and Parental Decision‐Making.Jennifer Blumenthal-Barby & Douglas J. Opel - 2018 - Hastings Center Report 48 (2):33-39.
    Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein define a nudge as “any aspect of the choice architecture that alters people's behavior in a predictable way without forbidding any options or significantly changing their economic incentives.” Much has been written about the ethics of nudging competent adult patients. Less has been written about the ethics of nudging surrogates’ decision‐making and how the ethical considerations and arguments in that context might differ. Even less has been written about nudging surrogate decision‐making in the context of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Consent in Clinical Research.Collin O'Neil - 2018 - In Peter Schaber & Andreas Müller (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of the Ethics of Consent. New York, NY: Routledge. pp. 297-310.
    This article addresses two areas of continuing controversy about consent in clinical research: the question of when consent to low risk research is necessary, and the question of when consent to research is valid. The article identifies a number of considerations relevant to determining whether consent is necessary, chief of which is whether the study would involve subjects in ways that would (otherwise) infringe their rights. When consent is necessary, there is a further question of under what conditions consent is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark