期刊
JOURNAL OF MEDICINE AND PHILOSOPHY
卷 32, 期 2, 页码 99-116出版社
TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/03605310701255727
关键词
common good; common rule; equipoise; non-exploitation; reasonable risk; therapeutic obligation
This article argues that lingering uncertainty about the normative foundations of research ethics is perpetuated by two unfounded dogmas of research ethics. The first dogma is that clinical research, as a social activity, is an inherently utilitarian endeavor. The second dogma is that an acceptable framework for research ethics must impose constraints on this endeavor whose moral force is grounded in role-related obligations of either physicians or researchers. This article argues that these dogmas are common to traditional articulations of the equipoise requirement and to recently articulated alternatives, such as the non-exploitation approach. Moreover, important shortcomings of these approaches can be traced to their acceptance of these dogmas. After highlighting These shortcomings, this article illustrates the benefits of rejecting these dogmas by sketching The broad outlines of an alternative called the integrative approach to clinical research.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据