Article Text
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Facing up to the ethics committee
Elizabeth Fistein and Sally Quilligan's experiences of research ethics committees (see page 224) provide us with a glimpse of the interesting set of ethical issues surrounding the ethical governance of research. The biggest and arguably most intractable of these is how to judge between respect for autonomy (through the process of consent), the potential harm or benefit to the participant, and the overall value of the research. These are the big three—the researcher is very likely to judge them differently from the ethics committee member.
Fistein and Quilligan's experiences also raise questions about the relationship between method and ethics. Methodological questions are clearly important for the ethics of research, but that does not help when non-experts in the research methodology make (ill-informed) judgements about that methodology. Their advice to the novice here seems to me to be spot on: ‘Take great care explaining methodology’. The distinction between audit and research comes up …
Linked Articles
- Clinical ethics
- Research ethics
- Clinical ethics
- Clinical ethics
- Clinical ethics
Other content recommended for you
- Snapshots of five clinical ethics committees in the UK
- Practising what we preach
- The Freiburg approach to ethics consultation: process, outcome and competencies
- Consultation activities of clinical ethics committees in the United Kingdom: an empirical study and wake-up call
- and who are clinical ethics committees for?
- The Ethics Liaison Program: building a moral community
- Ethics and the structures of health care in the European countries in transition: hospital ethics committees in Croatia
- Education of ethics committee members: experiences from Croatia
- Teaching old dogs new tricks—a personal perspective on a decade of efforts by a clinical ethics committee to promote awareness of medical ethics
- Post-trial access to study medication: a Brazilian e-survey with major stakeholders in clinical research