Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Hopes for Helsinki: reconsidering “vulnerability”
Free
  1. Lisa A Eckenwiler1,
  2. Carolyn Ells2,
  3. Dafna Feinholz3,
  4. Toby Schonfeld4
  1. 1
    Center for Health Policy Research and Ethics, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA
  2. 2
    Biomedical Ethics Unit, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  3. 3
    National Commission of Bioethics, Col Jardines del Pedregal, México
  4. 4
    Health Promotion, Social and Behavioral Health Sciences, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA
  1. Dr L A Eckenwiler, Center for Health Policy Research and Ethics, George Mason University, Robinson B 472C, 4400 University Avenue, MS 2D7, Fairfax, Virginia 22030, USA; leckenwi{at}gmu.edu

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

The Declaration of Helsinki is recognised worldwide as a cornerstone of research ethics. Working in the wake of the Nazi doctors’ trials at Nuremberg, drafters of the Declaration set out to codify the obligations of physician-researchers to research participants. Its significance cannot be overstated. Indeed, it is cited in most major guidelines on research involving humans and in the regulations of over a dozen countries.

Although it has undergone five revisions,1 and most recently incorporated (albeit controversial) language aimed at addressing concerns over research carried out in resource-poor countries,25 the Declaration could go much farther in addressing the profoundly altered landscape of research with humans. Research involving humans is now a global enterprise and often involves participants from resource-poor countries. Rather than being carried out at single institutions by veteran researchers, many studies are now conducted at many locations—including sites that are not academic medical centres—by new and relatively inexperienced investigators. A growing number of projects involve novel agents, based on innovative work in genomics and proteomics. Increasingly, research is sponsored by the for-profit sector. National governments and professional organisations around the globe provide laws, regulations and standards for the conduct of research involving humans. Considerable scholarship also critiques and guides this endeavour.

In light of the current effort of the World Medical Association (WMA) to revise the Declaration, we offer ideas on how to re-conceive the concept of “vulnerability” and its links with the principle of justice and, in turn, redirect the attention of researchers towards those who might be so designated.

In the research context, “vulnerability” is associated with an inability partly or totally to protect one’s own interests. Typically, conceptions of vulnerability centre upon characteristics associated with particular groups (such as children, prisoners, indigenous people, those who are ill and the poor) that …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None.

Other content recommended for you