Understanding, interests and informed consent: a reply to Sreenivasan

Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (4):327-331 (2015)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
It is widely agreed that the view of informed consent found in the regulations and guidelines struggles to keep pace with the ever-advancing enterprise of human subjects research. Over the last 10 years, there have been serious attempts to rethink informed consent so that it conforms to our considered judgments about cases where we are confident valid consent has been given. These arguments are influenced by an argument from Gopal Sreenivasan, which apparently shows that a potential participant's consent to research participation can be perfectly valid even if she fails to understand the risk-benefit profile of the study. I argue that Sreenivasan's argument fails. The set of clinical trials that is supposed to be ethical in the face of this kind of ignorance is empty. However, I argue that his argument is nonetheless instructive in allowing us to identify three important but neglected areas for future conceptual research on informed consent. I close by arguing that research on these identified questions promises to yield a defensible view of consent, lessen the burden of ambiguity on researchers attempting to obtain consent to research participation, and facilitate socially valuable research.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2017-11-14
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
False Hopes and Best Data: Consent to Research and the Therapeutic Misconception.Appelbaum, Paul S.; Roth, Loren H.; Lidz, Charles W.; Benson, Paul & Winslade, William

View all 16 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Understanding, Communication, and Consent.Millum, Joseph & Bromwich, Danielle
Informed Consent: A Matter of Aspiration Since 1966.Wieten, Sarah; Blythe, Jacob & Magnus, David
What is in a Name? Parent, Professional and Policy-Maker Conceptions of Consent-Related Language in the Context of Newborn Screening.Nicholls, Stuart G.; Etchegary, Holly; Tessier, Laure; Simmonds, Charlene; Potter, Beth K.; Brehaut, Jamie C.; Pullman, Daryl; Hayeems, Robin Z.; Zelenietz, Sari; Lamoureux, Monica; Milburn, Jennifer; Turner, Lesley; Chakraborty, Pranesh & Wilson, Brenda J.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
196 ( #21,882 of 50,101 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
23 ( #26,266 of 50,101 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.