Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Exploitation and International Clinical Research: The Disconnect Between Goals and Policy.Danielle M. Wenner - 2018 - In David Boonin (ed.), Palgrave Handbook of Philosophy and Public Policy. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 563-574.
    A growing proportion of clinical research funded by pharmaceutical companies, high-income country research agencies, and not-for-profit funders is conducted in low- and middle-income settings. Disparities in wealth and access to healthcare between the populations where new interventions are often tested and those where many of them are ultimately marketed raise concerns about exploitation. This chapter examines several ethical requirements frequently advanced as mechanisms for protecting research subjects in underserved communities from exploitation and evaluates the effectiveness of those mechanisms as responses (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Vulnerable groups and the hollow promise of benefit from human gene editing.Ryan Tonkens - 2021 - Bioethics 35 (6):574-580.
    Mainstream academic debate on the ethics of human gene editing is currently not as inclusive as it should be. For example, it currently does not give due consideration to Indigenous groups and cultures, such as those living in rural and remote areas of Canada. Once such people are given due consideration, then several important points emerge, which have so far gone unnoticed or under‐emphasized in the debate. This article focuses on two of those points: (a) Some vulnerable people who are (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Our Life Depends on This Drug: Competence, Inequity, and Voluntary Consent in Clinical Trials on Supervised Injectable Opioid Assisted Treatment.Daniel Steel, Kirsten Marchand & Eugenia Oviedo-Joekes - 2017 - American Journal of Bioethics 17 (12):32-40.
    Supervised injectable opioid assisted treament prescribes injectable opioids to individuals for whom other forms of addiction treatment have been ineffective. In this article, we examine arguments that opioid-dependent people should be assumed incompetent to voluntarily consent to clinical research on siOAT unless proven otherwise. We agree that concerns about competence and voluntary consent deserve careful attention in this context. But we oppose framing the issue solely as a matter of the competence of opioid-dependent people and emphasize that it should be (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • A Closer Look at the Business Case for Diversity: The Tangled Web of Equity and Epistemic Benefits.Daniel Steel & Naseeb Bolduc - 2020 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 50 (5):418-443.
    This article examines the business case for diversity, according to which diversity should be promoted because diverse groups outperform nondiverse groups. Philosophers who defend BCD usually...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Exploitation and outcome.Richard Arneson - 2013 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 12 (4):392-412.
    Exploitation is interacting with another in a way that takes unfair advantage of that person. Exploitation is thought to be morally wrong even when it would bring about the best attainable outcome, hence conflicts with the consequentialist morality that holds one ought always to do whatever would bring about the best outcome. This essay aims to reconcile norms against exploitation and act consequentialism. A puzzle about exploitation is raised and resolved.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • A Social Connection Model for International Clinical Research.Agomoni Ganguli Mitra - 2013 - American Journal of Bioethics 13 (3):W1 - W2.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Taking Advantage of Injustice.Erik Malmqvist - 2013 - Social Theory and Practice 39 (4):557-580.
    What, if anything, is wrong with taking advantage of people’s unjust circumstances when they both benefit from and consent to the exchange? The answer, some believe, is that such exchanges are wrongfully exploitative. I argue that this answer is incomplete at best, and I elaborate a different one: to take advantage of injustice is to become complicit in its reproduction. I also argue that the case for third-party interference with mutually beneficial and consensual exchanges, while normally considered weak, is strengthened (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations