Cargando…
The most plausible pro-coercion view: requiring informed agreement while penalizing non-participation in research
In ‘(Why) should we require consent to research?’ Alan Wertheimer probes whether it is legitimate for the government to ‘coerce’ people into participating in biomedical research, including interventional biomedical research. In debating the rules that ought to govern participation in interventional...
Autor principal: | Barnhill, Anne |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5033559/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27774188 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsu034 |
Ejemplares similares
-
Informed consent to participation in interventional studies: second-order in a different sense
por: Eyal, Nir
Publicado: (2015) -
Drinking from the Data Well: Response to Gamete donor anonymity and limits on numbers of offspring: the views of three stakeholders
por: Ertman, Martha M.
Publicado: (2016) -
Commentary: Coercion in Psychiatry: Lessons Learned from Trauma-Informed
Care
por: Jin, Jonathan, et al.
Publicado: (2022) -
Reciprocity-Based Reasons for Benefiting Research Participants: Most Fail, the Most Plausible is Problematic
por: Sofaer, Neema
Publicado: (2014) -
Science wars—How much risk should soldiers be exposed to in military experimentation?
por: Savulescu, Julian
Publicado: (2015)