Literature DB >> 25433817

Body matters: rethinking the ethical acceptability of non-beneficial clinical research with children.

Eva De Clercq1, Domnita Oana Badarau, Katharina M Ruhe, Tenzin Wangmo.   

Abstract

The involvement of children in non-beneficial clinical research is extremely important for improving pediatric care, but its ethical acceptability is still disputed. Therefore, various pro-research justifications have been proposed throughout the years. The present essay aims at contributing to the on-going discussion surrounding children's participation in non-beneficial clinical research. Building on Wendler's 'contribution to a valuable project' justification, but going beyond a risk/benefit analysis, it articulates a pro-research argument which appeals to a phenomenological view on the body and vulnerability. It is claimed that children's bodies are not mere physical objects, but body-subjects due to which children, as persons, can contribute to research that may hold no direct clinical benefit to them even before they can give informed consent.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25433817     DOI: 10.1007/s11019-014-9616-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Health Care Philos        ISSN: 1386-7423


  36 in total

1.  Biomedical experimentation involving children: balancing the need for protective measures with the need to respect children's developing ability to make significant life decisions for themselves.

Authors:  D N Weisstub; S N Verdun-Jones
Journal:  Health Law Can       Date:  1999-02

2.  Vulnerability: too vague and too broad?

Authors:  Doris Schroeder; Eugenijus Gefenas
Journal:  Camb Q Healthc Ethics       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 1.284

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.  Experimentation in children: sharing in sociality.

Authors:  R A McCormick
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  1976-12       Impact factor: 2.683

5.  Do U.S. regulations allow more than minor increase over minimal risk pediatric research? Should they?

Authors:  David Wendler
Journal:  IRB       Date:  2013 Nov-Dec

6.  Ethics and clinical research.

Authors:  H K Beecher
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1966-06-16       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  The limits of autonomy: the Belmont Report and the history of childhood.

Authors:  Tamar W Carroll; Myron P Gutmann
Journal:  J Hist Med Allied Sci       Date:  2010-04-23       Impact factor: 2.088

8.  Vulnerability in research and health care; describing the elephant in the room?

Authors:  Samia A Hurst
Journal:  Bioethics       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 1.898

9.  How do institutional review boards apply the federal risk and benefit standards for pediatric research?

Authors:  Seema Shah; Amy Whittle; Benjamin Wilfond; Gary Gensler; David Wendler
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-01-28       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  The vulnerable and the susceptible.

Authors:  Michael H Kottow
Journal:  Bioethics       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 1.898

View more
  2 in total

1.  Is decision-making capacity an "essentially contested" concept in pediatrics?

Authors:  Eva De Clercq; Katharina Ruhe; Michel Rost; Bernice Elger
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2017-09

2.  Child's objection to non-beneficial research: capacity and distress based models.

Authors:  Marcin Waligora; Joanna Różyńska; Jan Piasecki
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2016-03
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.