Article Text
Statistics from Altmetric.com
This issue of the journal sees a number of exchanges on significant ethical problems. ‘Nudges’ have attracted a good deal of attention recently in the context of the ethics of public health interventions. Martin Wilkinson (see page 486) writes a guest editorial introducing important debate on Yashar Saghai's featured article, Salvaging the concept of nudge (see page 487, Editor’s choice). Also, Timothy Murphy (see page 529) locks horns with Katrien Devolder (see page 533) and Ezio Di Nucci (see page 537) on the doctrine of double effect as it applies to research on embryos.
One of the exchanges published here involves the legitimacy of research ethics review. Murray Dyck and Gary Allen (see page 517) claim that only in a small minority of cases is research ethics review warranted and that, in the main, responsibility for the ethical conduct of research should lie with the researchers themselves.
However, David Hunter (see page 521) Mark Israel (see …
Linked Articles
- Feature article
- Reproductive ethics
- Research ethics
- Reproductive ethics
- Editorial
- Reproductive ethics
- Research ethics
- Research ethics
- Research ethics
Other content recommended for you
- The role of the principle of double effect in ethics education at US medical schools and its potential impact on pain management at the end of life
- Does the doctrine of double effect apply to the prescription of barbiturates? Syme vs the Medical Board of Australia
- Further clarity on cooperation and morality
- Health policy and systems research: towards a better understanding and review of ethical issues
- In defence of governance: ethics review and social research
- Terminal sedation and the “imminence condition”
- Can facilitated aid in dying be permitted by ‘double effect’? Some reflections from a recent New Zealand case
- Determining the need for ethical review: a three-stage Delphi study
- Ethical end-of-life palliative care: response to Riisfeldt
- The concise argument