Literature DB >> 31419191

How Payment for Research Participation Can Be Coercive.

Joseph Millum1, Michael Garnett2.   

Abstract

The idea that payment for research participation can be coercive appears widespread among research ethics committee members, researchers, and regulatory bodies. Yet analysis of the concept of coercion by philosophers and bioethicists has mostly concluded that payment does not coerce, because coercion necessarily involves threats, not offers. In this article we aim to resolve this disagreement by distinguishing between two distinct but overlapping concepts of coercion. Consent-undermining coercion marks out certain actions as impermissible and certain agreements as unenforceable. By contrast, coercion as subjection indicates a way in which someone's interests can be partially set back in virtue of being subject to another's foreign will. While offers of payment do not normally constitute consent-undermining coercion, they do sometimes constitute coercion as subjection. We offer an analysis of coercion as subjection and propose three possible practical responses to worries about the coerciveness of payment.

Keywords:  human subjects research; informed consent; international/global health; motivation; philosophy; research ethics

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31419191     DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2019.1630497

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Bioeth        ISSN: 1526-5161            Impact factor:   11.229


  6 in total

1.  Coercion as Subjection and the Institutional Review Board.

Authors:  David B Resnik
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 11.229

2.  Response to Open Peer Commentaries on "How Payment for Research Participation Can Be Coercive".

Authors:  Joseph Millum; Michael Garnett
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 11.229

3.  Coercive Offers Without Coercion as Subjection.

Authors:  Benjamin Rossi; William R Smith
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 11.229

4.  Standards of evidence for institutional review board decision-making.

Authors:  David B Resnik
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2020-12-08       Impact factor: 3.057

5.  Cohorts as collections of bodies and communities of persons: insights from the SEARCH010/RV254 research cohort.

Authors:  Gail E Henderson; Stuart Rennie; Amy Corneli; Holly L Peay
Journal:  Int Health       Date:  2020-11-09       Impact factor: 3.131

6.  Payment in challenge studies: ethics, attitudes and a new payment for risk model.

Authors:  Olivia Grimwade; Julian Savulescu; Alberto Giubilini; Justin Oakley; Joshua Osowicki; Andrew J Pollard; Anne-Marie Nussberger
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2020-09-25       Impact factor: 2.903

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.