Journal of Disability Policy Studies

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Noble, J. H.
Right arrow Articles by Sharav, V. H.
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Noble, J. H., Jr
Right arrow Articles by Sharav, V. H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Journal of Disability Policy Studies, Vol. 18, No. 4, 230-244 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1044207307311532
© 2008 Hammill Institute on Disabilities

Protecting People With Decisional Impairments and Legal Incapacity Against Biomedical Research Abuse

John H. Noble, Jr

State University of New York at Buffalo, jhnoble{at}verizon.net

Vera Hassner Sharav

Alliance for Human Research Protection, New York

Ethical and legal principles are provided for reviewing the ethics of recent cases of biomedical research abuse involving persons with decisional impairments or legal incapacity who were unable to understand the risks and benefits of the research to which they were subjected. Research abuse continues to occur despite guidance from the Nuremburg Code, the Declaration of Helsinki, the U.S. Belmont Report, extensive federal regulations governing human participant research, and several professional and disciplinary codes of ethics with which, the authors believe, the majority of researchers comply. Contributing to research abuse are weaknesses in the institutional review board and research ethics board review process; conflicting opinions about applicable ethical principles; mounting evidence of pervasive conflicts of interest; and dubious conflated research and marketing practices involving researchers, pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers, and government research sponsors and regulatory agencies. Several recommendations are made to correct identifiable weaknesses and failures in the governance of biomedical research.

Key Words: research ethics • human participants abuse • decisional impairments • Nuremberg Code • institutional review boards • conflicts of interest


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?