Article Text
PDFResponse
The moral primacy of the human being: a reply to Parker
Abstract
In a previous paper in the Journal of Medical Ethics, the authors argued that the research ethical principle stating that the individual shall have priority over science, found in many guidelines, is utterly unclear and because of this should be explicated or otherwise deleted. In a recent commentary, Parker argued that this leaves us defending a position that would allow totalitarian regimes to pursue glory at the expense of its citizens. The present response addresses this and similar accusations.
- ethical guidelines
- ethics
- institutional review boards
- policy guidelines
- primacy principle
- research subjects
- review committees
- scientific research
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Funding The original paper criticised by Parker was part of a project funded by Riksbankens Jubileumsfond.
Competing interests None.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- The 2008 Declaration of Helsinki: some reflections
- Against the principle that the individual shall have priority over science
- The nature and ethics of natural experiments
- The case for a new system for oversight of research on human subjects
- Navigating individual and collective interests in medical ethics
- Scientific research is a moral duty
- Ethical issues raised by intergenerational monitoring in clinical trials of germline gene modification
- Non-equivalent stringency of ethical review in the Baltic States: a sign of a systematic problem in Europe?
- What does ‘respect for persons’ require? Attitudes and reported practices of genetics researchers in informing research participants about research
- Ethical frameworks in clinical research processes during COVID-19: a scoping review