Article Text
PDFResponse
Response to Sheehan et al’s ‘In defence of governance: ethics review and social research’
Abstract
This response welcomes Sheehan et al’s discussion of the criticisms that have been made of mandatory, pre-emptive ethics regulation and their outline of a philosophical rationale for it. However, it is argued that they misrepresent some of the key criticisms and fail to provide any effective response to them.
- ethics
- ethics committees/consultation
- research ethics
- sociology
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Linked Articles
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- In defence of governance: ethics review and social research
- Life in the cloud and freedom of speech
- Better governance in academic health sciences centres: moving beyond the Olivieri/Apotex Affair in Toronto
- 3D bioprint me: a socioethical view of bioprinting human organs and tissues
- Reasonable disagreement and the justification of pre-emptive ethics governance in social research: a response to Hammersley
- How not to argue against mandatory ethics review
- Strengthening ethics committees for health-related research in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review protocol
- Exploring areas of consensus and conflict around values underpinning public involvement in health and social care research: a modified Delphi study
- Research ethics in dissertations: ethical issues and complexity of reasoning
- Should all medical research be published? The moral responsibility of medical journal editors