Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Why Is Therapeutic Misconception So Prevalent?Charles W. Lidz, Karen Albert, Paul Appelbaum, Laura B. Dunn, Eve Overton & Ekaterina Pivovarova - 2015 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (2):231-241.
    Abstract:Therapeutic misconception (TM)—when clinical research participants fail to adequately grasp the difference between participating in a clinical trial and receiving ordinary clinical care—has long been recognized as a significant problem in consent to clinical trials. We suggest that TM does not primarily reflect inadequate disclosure or participants’ incompetence. Instead, TM arises from divergent primary cognitive frames. The researchers’ frame places the clinical trial in the context of scientific designs for assessing intervention efficacy. In contrast, most participants have a cognitive frame (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Identifying the normative challenges posed by technology’s ‘soft’ impacts.Tsjalling Swierstra - 2015 - Etikk I Praksis - Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics 1 (1):5-20.
    In this paper I argue that we can no longer afford to ignore technology’s so-called ‘soft’ impacts, as this type of impact is becoming increasingly prominent in affluent societies where people have sufficient resources to pursue self-realization and where technologies are becoming more and more ‘intimate’ as they pervade our life world. These soft impacts come with their own type of normative challenges. The first challenge is to acknowledge the mutual shaping of technology and morality that causes soft impacts to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  • Vulnerability, therapeutic misconception and informed consent: is there a need for special treatment of pregnant women in fetus-regarding clinical trials?Maria Kreszentia Sheppard - 2016 - Journal of Medical Ethics 42 (2):127-131.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Artificial womb technology and the frontiers of human reproduction: conceptual differences and potential implications.Elizabeth Chloe Romanis - 2018 - Journal of Medical Ethics 44 (11):751-755.
    In 2017, a Philadelphia research team revealed the closest thing to an artificial womb the world had ever seen. The ‘biobag’, if as successful as early animal testing suggests, will change the face of neonatal intensive care. At present, premature neonates born earlier than 22 weeks have no hope of survival. For some time, there have been no significant improvements in mortality rates or incidences of long-term complications for preterms at the viability threshold. Artificial womb technology, that might change these (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   47 citations  
  • Therapeutic appropriation: a new concept in the ethics of clinical research.Rosalind McDougall, Dominique Martin, Lynn Gillam, Nina Hallowell, Alison Brookes & Marilys Guillemin - 2016 - Journal of Medical Ethics 42 (12):805-808.
    Ethical concerns about therapeutic misconception have been raised since the early 1980s. This concept was originally described as research participants' assumptions that decisions relating to research interventions are made on the basis of their individual therapeutic needs. The term has since been used to refer to a range of ‘misunderstandings’ that research participants may have. In this paper, we describe a new concept—therapeutic appropriation. Therapeutic appropriation occurs when patients, or clinicians, actively reframe research participation as an opportunity to enhance patients' (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Ethics Considerations Regarding Artificial Womb Technology for the Fetonate.Felix R. De Bie, Sarah D. Kim, Sourav K. Bose, Pamela Nathanson, Emily A. Partridge, Alan W. Flake & Chris Feudtner - 2022 - American Journal of Bioethics 23 (5):67-78.
    Since the early 1980’s, with the clinical advent of in vitro fertilization resulting in so-called “test tube babies,” a wide array of ethical considerations and concerns regarding artificial womb technology (AWT) have been described. Recent breakthroughs in the development of extracorporeal neonatal life support by means of AWT have reinitiated ethical interest about this topic with a sense of urgency. Most of the recent ethical literature on the topic, however, pertains not to the more imminent scenario of a physiologically improved (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   27 citations  
  • The Subjects of Ectogenesis: Are “Gestatelings” Fetuses, Newborns, or Neither?Nick Colgrove - 2019 - Journal of Medical Ethics 45 (11):723-726.
    Subjects of ectogenesis—human beings that are developing in artificial wombs (AWs)—share the same moral status as newborns. To demonstrate this, I defend two claims. First, subjects of partial ectogenesis—those that develop in utero for a time before being transferred to AWs—are newborns (in the full sense of the word). Second, subjects of complete ectogenesis—those who develop in AWs entirely—share the same moral status as newborns. To defend the first claim, I rely on Elizabeth Chloe Romanis’s distinctions between fetuses, newborns and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   28 citations