Literature DB >> 17043925

Does an appeal to the common good justify individual sacrifices for genomic research?

Rogeer Hoedemaekers1, Bert Gordijn, Martien Pijnenburg.   

Abstract

In genomic research the ideal standard of free, informed, prior, and explicit consent is believed to restrict important research studies. For certain types of genomic research other forms of consent are therefore proposed which are ethically justified by an appeal to the common good. This notion is often used in a general sense and this forms a weak basis for the use of weaker forms of consent. Here we examine how the notion of the common good can be related to individual health, health care, and genomic research and we use this analysis to propose more precise criteria to justify forms of consent which diverge from the ideal standard.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17043925     DOI: 10.1007/s11017-006-9015-8

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


  10 in total

1.  Iceland's database is ethically questionable.

Authors:  Bogi Andersen; Einar Arnason
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-06-05

2.  Second thoughts about U.S. Patent #4,438,032.

Authors:  Beth Burrows
Journal:  Bull Med Ethics       Date:  1997-01

3.  Threats to the common good. Biochemical weapons and human subjects research.

Authors:  Alex John London
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  2003 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.683

4.  A vision for the future of genomics research.

Authors:  Francis S Collins; Eric D Green; Alan E Guttmacher; Mark S Guyer
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2003-04-14       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  Lack of data privacy could hamper pharmacogenomics studies.

Authors:  Ken Howard
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 84.694

6.  The human tissue bill.

Authors:  Peter Furness; Richard Sullivan
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-03-06

7.  New European guidelines for the use of stored human biological materials in biomedical research.

Authors:  C Trouet
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 2.903

8.  Informed consent for population-based research involving genetics.

Authors:  L M Beskow; W Burke; J F Merz; P A Barr; S Terry; V B Penchaszadeh; L O Gostin; M Gwinn; M J Khoury
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-11-14       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Health and adaptedness.

Authors:  I Pörn
Journal:  Theor Med       Date:  1993-12

10.  Problematic notions in Dutch health care package decisions.

Authors:  Rogeer Hoedemaekers; Wija Oortwijn
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2003-12
  10 in total
  3 in total

Review 1.  Children and biobanks: a review of the ethical and legal discussion.

Authors:  Kristien Hens; Emmanuelle Lévesque; Kris Dierickx
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2011-06-10       Impact factor: 4.132

2.  Children, biobanks and the scope of parental consent.

Authors:  Kristien Hens; Jean-Jacques Cassiman; Herman Nys; Kris Dierickx
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2011-03-09       Impact factor: 4.246

3.  Biobanking research on oncological residual material: a framework between the rights of the individual and the interest of society.

Authors:  Luciana Caenazzo; Pamela Tozzo; Renzo Pegoraro
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2013-04-02       Impact factor: 2.652

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.