In this paper, I explore the ethics of subject selection in the context of biomedical research. I reject a key principle of what I shall refer to as the standard view. According to this principle, investigators should select participants so as to minimise aggregate risk to participants and maximise aggregate benefits to participants and society. On this view, investigators should exclude prospective participants who are more susceptible to risk than other prospective participants. I argue instead that investigators should select subjects in accordance with an alternative principle: formal equality of opportunity. According to this principle, investigators must treat all prospective participants the same unless differential treatment is warranted by the scientific goals of the study or the need to promote participants' medically related interests. All prospective participants (1) who meet the scientifically defined eligibility criteria and (2) for whom participation is consistent with their medically related interests should have an equal, formal opportunity to participate in the study. Prospective participants should not be excluded simply because they are more susceptible to risk than others.
- Distributive Justice
- Policy Guidelines/Inst. Review Boards/Review Cttes.
- Research Ethics
Statistics from Altmetric.com
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.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Fair and equitable subject selection in concurrent COVID-19 clinical trials
- Responsibility in health care: a liberal egalitarian approach
- A Systematic review protocol on workplace equality and inclusion practices in the healthcare sector
- Genetic information, insurance and a pluralistic approach to justice
- Legitimacy in bioethics: challenging the orthodoxy
- Justice and procedure: how does “accountability for reasonableness” result in fair limit-setting decisions?
- Donor-funded research: permissible, not perfect
- Caster semenya and a level playing field
- Is it ethical to keep interim findings of randomised controlled trials confidential?
- One principle and three fallacies of disability studies