| Literature DB >> 29148954 |
Daniel Steel1, Kirsten Marchand1, Eugenia Oviedo-Joekes1.
Abstract
Supervised injectable opioid assisted treament (siOAT) prescribes injectable opioids to individuals for whom other forms of addiction treatment have been ineffective. In this article, we examine arguments that opioid-dependent people should be assumed incompetent to voluntarily consent to clinical research on siOAT unless proven otherwise. We agree that concerns about competence and voluntary consent deserve careful attention in this context. But we oppose framing the issue solely as a matter of the competence of opioid-dependent people and emphasize that it should be considered in the context of inequities in access to siOAT as a medical treatment. Consequently, we suggest that bioethics literature on nonexploitation, which focuses on clinical research in low-income countries, is helpful due to locating ethical issues within systemic social conditions. Finally, we consider the implications of our argument for the ethics of clinical research on siOAT.Entities:
Keywords: informed consent; research ethics
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29148954 DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2017.1388449
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Am J Bioeth ISSN: 1526-5161 Impact factor: 11.229