Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Inducement in Research.Martin Wilkinson & Andrew Moore - 1997 - Bioethics 11 (5):373-389.
    Opposition to inducement payments for research subjects is an international orthodoxy amongst writers of ethics committee guidelines. We offer an argument in favour of these payments. We also critically evaluate the best arguments we can find or devise against such payments, and except in one very limited range of circumstances, we find these unconvincing.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   55 citations  
  • Exploitation.Alan Wertheimer - 1996 - Princeton University Press.
    What is the basis for arguing that a volunteer army exploits citizens who lack civilian career opportunities? How do we determine that a doctor who has sex with his patients is exploiting them? In this book, Alan Wertheimer seeks to identify when a transaction or relationship can be properly regarded as exploitative--and not oppressive, manipulative, or morally deficient in some other way--and explores the moral weight of taking unfair advantage. Among the first political philosophers to examine this important topic from (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   131 citations  
  • 'Due' and 'Undue' Inducements: On Pasing Money to Research Subjects.Ruth Macklin - 1981 - IRB: Ethics & Human Research 3 (5):1.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   49 citations  
  • Justice for the Professional Guinea Pig.Trudo Lemmens & Carl Elliott - 2001 - American Journal of Bioethics 1 (2):51-53.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  • How much are subjects paid to participate in research?Jessica Latterman & Jon F. Merz - 2001 - American Journal of Bioethics 1 (2):45 – 46.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Money for research participation: Does it jeopardize informed consent?Christine Grady - 2001 - American Journal of Bioethics 1 (2):40 – 44.
    Some are concerned about the possibility that offering money for research participation can constitute coercion or undue influence capable of distorting the judgment of potential research subjects and compromising the voluntariness of their informed consent. The author recognizes that more often than not there are multiple influences leading to decisions, including decisions about research participation. The concept of undue influence is explored, as well as the question of whether or not there is something uniquely distorting about money as opposed to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   59 citations  
  • Research-Related Injury: Problems and Solutions.Larry D. Scott - 2003 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 31 (3):419-428.
    The highly publicized deaths of research participants Ellen Roche and Jesse Gelsinger are stark reminders that risk is inherent in medical research and while untoward outcomes are infrequent when compared to individual and societal benefits, injury and even death will happen. Who is responsible for the welfare of research subjects and what are they owed? Why were they put at risk to begin with? Are obligations, if any, to research subjects dependent on the type of study in which they participate, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Ending Concerns about Undue Inducement.Ezekiel J. Emanuel - 2004 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 32 (1):100-105.
    For decades, worries about undue inducement have Pervaded clinical research, and are especially common when research is accompanied by payment or conducted in developing countries. Few ethical judgments carry as much moral opprobrium or are thought to undermine the ethical soundness of a clinical trial as thoroughly as undue inducement. Indeed, the admonition to prevent undue inducement is one of the few explicit instructions in the Common Rules requirements for informed consent.Despite their long history and pervasiveness, charges of undue inducement (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   35 citations  
  • Phase I cancer trials: A collusion of misunderstanding.Matthew Miller - 2000 - Hastings Center Report 30 (4):34-43.
    Physician‐investigators face the daunting task of enrolling desperate patients into Phase I cancer trials that are not meant to be therapeutic. Patients doggedly regard the trials as therapeutic, and researchers tend to collaborate in their confusion by glossing the trials’ true purposes and noting the occasional benefit that subjects accidentally receive. The disparity between hope and fact must be redressed by degrees, from many angles at once.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   31 citations  
  • (1 other version)Paying People to Participate in Research: Why not?Paul McNeill - 1997 - Bioethics 11 (5):390-396.
    This paper argues against paying people to participate in research. Volunteering to participate as a subject in a research program is not like taking a job. The main difference is to do with the risks inherent in research. Experimentation on human beings is, by definition, trying out something with an unknown consequence and exposes people to risks of harm which cannot be known in advance. This is the main reason for independent review by committee of research programs. It is based (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   35 citations  
  • Exploitation in biomedical research.David B. Resnik - 2003 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 24 (3):233--259.
    This essay analyzesexploitation in biomedical research in terms ofthree basic elements: harm, disrespect, orinjustice. There are also degrees ofexploitation, ranging from highly exploitationto minimally exploitation. Althoughexploitation is prima facie wrongful,some exploitative research studies are morallyjustified, all things considered. The reasonan exploitative study can still be ethical isthat other moral considerations, such as theautonomy of the research subject or the socialbenefits of research, may sometimes justifystudies that are minimally exploitative. Calling a research project exploitative doesnot end the debate about the merits (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • Bioethics, vulnerability, and protection.Ruth Macklin - 2003 - Bioethics 17 (5-6):472--486.
    What makes individuals, groups, or even entire countries vulnerable? And why is vulnerability a concern in bioethics? A simple answer to both questions is that vulnerable individuals and groups are subject to exploitation, and exploitation is morally wrong. This analysis is limited to two areas. First is the context of multinational research, in which vulnerable people can be exploited even if they are not harmed, and harmed even if they are not exploited. Second is the situation of women, who are (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   56 citations  
  • When Experiments Go Wrong: The U.S. Perspective.Alexander M. Capron - 2004 - Journal of Clinical Ethics 15 (1):22-29.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The research subject as wage earner.James A. Anderson & Charles Weijer - 2002 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 23 (4-5):359-376.
    The practice of paying research subjects for participating inclinical trials has yet to receive an adequate moral analysis.Dickert and Grady argue for a wage payment model in whichresearch subjects are paid an hourly wage based on that ofunskilled laborers. If we accept this approach, what follows?Norms for just working conditions emerge from workplacelegislation and political theory. All workers, includingpaid research subjects under Dickert and Grady''s analysis,have a right to at least minimum wage, a standard work week,extra pay for overtime hours, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  • The influence of risk and monetary payment on the research participation decision making process.J. P. Bentley - 2004 - Journal of Medical Ethics 30 (3):293-298.
    Objectives: To determine the effects of risk and payment on subjects’ willingness to participate, and to examine how payment influences subjects’ potential behaviours and risk evaluations.Methods: A 3 × 3 , between subjects, completely randomised factorial design was used. Students enrolled at one of five US pharmacy schools read a recruitment notice and informed consent form for a hypothetical study, and completed a questionnaire. Risk level was manipulated using recruitment notices and informed consent documents from hypothetical biomedical research projects. Payment (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   46 citations  
  • The Ethics of Phase I Pediatric Oncology Trials.Terrence F. Ackerman - 1995 - IRB: Ethics & Human Research 17 (1):1.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • (1 other version)Paying People to Participate in Research: Why not?McNeill Paul - 2002 - Bioethics 11 (5):390-396.
    This paper argues against paying people to participate in research. Volunteering to participate as a subject in a research program is not like taking a job. The main difference is to do with the risks inherent in research. Experimentation on human beings is, by definition, trying out something with an unknown consequence and exposes people to risks of harm which cannot be known in advance. This is the main reason for independent review by committee of research programs. It is based (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Moral Standards for Research in Developing Countries from "Reasonable Availability" to "Fair Benefits".Maged El Setouhy, Tsiri Agbenyega, Francis Anto, Christine Alexandra Clerk, Kwadwo A. Koram, Michael English, Rashid Juma, Catherine Molyneux, Norbert Peshu, Newton Kumwenda, Joseph Mfutso-Bengu, Malcolm Molyneux, Terrie Taylor, Doumbia Aissata Diarra, Saibou Maiga, Mamadou Sylla, Dione Youssouf, Catherine Olufunke Falade, Segun Gbadegesin, Reidar Lie, Ferdinand Mugusi, David Ngassapa, Julius Ecuru, Ambrose Talisuna, Ezekiel Emanuel, Christine Grady, Elizabeth Higgs, Christopher Plowe, Jeremy Sugarman & David Wendler - 2004 - Hastings Center Report 34 (3):17.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   42 citations  
  • (1 other version)Children as Research Subjects: A Dilemma.Loretta M. Kopelman - 2000 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (6):723-744.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   28 citations