Literature DB >> 12948047

Universal compulsory service in medical research.

C D Herrera1.   

Abstract

Despite the prominence of healthcare-related concerns in public debate, the ground remains infertile for the idea of conscripting citizens into medical research. Reluctance to entertain the thought of a system where nearly everyone could be selected for service might reflect uncertainty about what the project would involve. There might also be a fear that the more crucial issue is how to protect research subjects within current, voluntary systems. No doubt reluctance to explore a system of universal service results from the common hope that each of us might avoid research in any capacity besides researcher. A system of full civic participation might, however, avoid many of the usual objections. Ethics regulations, including informed-consent guidelines, could for the most part remain in force. Though the system would compel people to serve, it could remain responsive to principles of autonomy and justice if it centered on broad public education, community representation, and a lottery-type selection process. The system could draw from the largest possible cross-section of society, and offer conscripts the widest possible range of service. In this way, a compulsory system might reconcile the expectations about healthcare with research needs.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Analytical Approach; Biomedical and Behavioral Research

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12948047     DOI: 10.1023/a:1024888622358

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


  4 in total

1.  The survival lottery.

Authors:  John Harris
Journal:  Philosophy       Date:  1975-01

2.  Legal considerations affecting clinical pharmacological studies in children.

Authors:  Alexander M Capron
Journal:  Clin Res       Date:  1973-02

3.  Statistics and ethics in surgery and anesthesia.

Authors:  J P Gilbert; B McPeek; F Mosteller
Journal:  Science       Date:  1977-11-18       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Leaving therapy to chance.

Authors:  D Marquis
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  1983-08       Impact factor: 2.683

  4 in total
  4 in total

1.  The obligation to participate in biomedical research.

Authors:  G Owen Schaefer; Ezekiel J Emanuel; Alan Wertheimer
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2009-07-01       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Participants' responsibilities in clinical research.

Authors:  David B Resnik; Elizabeth Ness
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2012-07-19       Impact factor: 2.903

3.  Privacy revisited? Old ideals, new realities, and their impact on biobank regimes.

Authors:  Arndt Bialobrzeski; Jens Ried; Peter Dabrock
Journal:  Poiesis Prax       Date:  2011-06-28

4.  Do people have an ethical obligation to share their health information? Comparing narratives of altruism and health information sharing in a nationally representative sample.

Authors:  Minakshi Raj; Raymond De Vries; Paige Nong; Sharon L R Kardia; Jodyn E Platt
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-12-31       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.