RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 What is the role of the research ethics committee? Paternalism, inducements, and harm in research ethics JF Journal of Medical Ethics JO J Med Ethics FD BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and Institute of Medical Ethics SP 419 OP 423 DO 10.1136/jme.2004.010447 VO 31 IS 7 A1 E Garrard A1 A Dawson YR 2005 UL http://jme.bmj.com/content/31/7/419.abstract AB In a recent paper Edwards, Kirchin, and Huxtable have argued that research ethics committees (RECs) are often wrongfully paternalistic in their approach to medical research. They argue that it should be left to competent potential research subjects to make judgments about the acceptability of harms and benefits relating to research, and that this is not a legitimate role for any REC. They allow an exception to their overall antipaternalism, however, in that they think RECs should have the power to prohibit the use of financial inducements to recruit research subjects into trials. In this paper it is argued that these claims are unjustified and implausible. A sketch is provided of an alternative model of the role of the REC as an expert body making judgments about the acceptability of research proposals through a consensual weighing of different moral considerations.