Literature DB >> 12943267

Should we presume moral turpitude in our children?--small children and consent to medical research.

John Harris1, Søren Holm.   

Abstract

When children are too young to make their own autonomous decisions, decisions have to be made for them. In certain contexts we allow parents and others to make these decisions, and do not interfere unless the decision clearly violates the best interest of the child. In other contexts we put a priori limits on what kind of decisions parents can make, and/or what kinds of considerations they have to take into account. Consent to medical research currently falls into the second group mentioned here. We want to consider and ultimately reject one of the arguments put forward for putting medical research into the second category. We will argue that some objections to children's participation in research are either based on an implausibly restrictive conception of what is in fact in the child's best interests or that there is an implicit and false premise hidden in this argument; i.e., the premise that our children have so deeply fallen into moral turpitude that we must assume that they would not want to fulfill their moral obligations, or, that they will grow up to be morally deficient and will then wish not to have acted well while a child.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Analytical Approach; Biomedical and Behavioral Research

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12943267     DOI: 10.1023/a:1024651013837

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth        ISSN: 1386-7415


  5 in total

1.  Autonomy, authenticity, or best interest: everyday decision-making and persons with dementia.

Authors:  S Holm
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2001

2.  Ethical genetic research on human subjects.

Authors:  J Harris
Journal:  Jurimetrics       Date:  1999

3.  The enforcement of morals: nontherapeutic research on children.

Authors:  P Ramsey
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  1976-08       Impact factor: 2.683

4.  Children as research subjects: a reply.

Authors:  P Ramsey
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  1977-04       Impact factor: 2.683

5.  Consent and end of life decisions.

Authors:  John Harris
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.903

  5 in total
  6 in total

1.  Increasing the participation of children in clinical research.

Authors:  Robert D Truog
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2005-04-21       Impact factor: 17.440

2.  Scientific research is a moral duty.

Authors:  John Harris
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.903

3.  Involving children in non-therapeutic research: on the development argument.

Authors:  Linus Broström; Mats Johansson
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2014-02

4.  Foetal surgery and using in utero therapies to reduce the degree of disability after birth. Could it be morally defensible or even morally required?

Authors:  Constantinos Kanaris
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2017-03

5.  In Defense of a Social Value Requirement for Clinical Research.

Authors:  David Wendler; Annette Rid
Journal:  Bioethics       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 1.898

6.  Surrogate consent to non-beneficial research: erring on the right side when substituted judgments may be inaccurate.

Authors:  Mats Johansson; Linus Broström
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2016-04
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.