PHIL 1165 Lecture Notes - Lecture 6: Arthur Caplan, George Annas, National Research Act
30 Sep 2016
School
Department
Course
Professor
Document Summary
Karina da rosa: vulnerable human subjects, historical background i. ii. Declaration of helsinki: what informed consent means, therapeutic vs non therapeutic iii. National research act: protection of human subjects. Low risk: ordinary distress to which consent is already implied, example : blood testing, medium risk, discomfort that will not resolve itself but is remedial, example : steve milgram iii. High risk: discomfort up to and including potential death, example : drug trials, deception in research i. ii. Prior general consent: overall review from irb. Ex post facto: after the fact, debriefing with study participants iii. Prior proxy consent: a significant other will decide for the research subject to participate or not, for children and impaired persons, vulnerable populations - arneson vs watson i. Arneson"s argument: clinical trials are not exploitative, watson believes otherwise (fairness + consen, concessions a. International drug trials can be but are not definitively exploitative: george annas i.
