scholarly journals Responsible research for the construction of maximally humanlike automata: the paradox of unattainable informed consent

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 297-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lantz Fleming Miller
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Research And Development ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Moral Rights ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Nuremberg Code ◽  
Human Research ◽  
Ethical Codes ◽  
Responsible Research

Abstract Since the Nuremberg Code and the first Declaration of Helsinki, globally there has been increasing adoption and adherence to procedures for ensuring that human subjects in research are as well informed as possible of the study’s reasons and risks and voluntarily consent to serving as subject. To do otherwise is essentially viewed as violation of the human research subject’s legal and moral rights. However, with the recent philosophical concerns about responsible robotics, the limits and ambiguities of research-subjects ethical codes become apparent on the matter of constructing automata that maximally resemble human beings (as defined hereunder). In this case, the automata themselves, as products of research and development, are in the very process of their construction subjects of research and development. However, such research faces a paradox: The subjects cannot give their informed consent to this research for their own development, although their consent would be needed for the research. According to ethical codes, this research would be unethical. The article then explores whether the background concepts giving rise to this paradox could be reframed in order to allow such research to proceed ethically.

scholarly journals Informed Consent, Body Property, and Self-Sovereignty

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-444 ◽  
Author(s):  
Radhika Rao
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Biological Materials ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Full Information ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Human Research ◽  
The Right ◽  
Human Research Subjects

Recent cases involving biosamples taken from indigenous tribes and newborn babies reveal the emptiness of informed consent. This venerable doctrine often functions as a charade, a collective fiction which thinly masks the uncomfortable fact that the subjects of human research are not actually afforded full information regarding the types of research that may be contemplated, nor do they provide meaningful consent. But if informed consent fails to provide adequate protection to the donors of biological materials, why not turn to principles of property law? Property is power, yet current law permits everyone except for those who donate biological materials to possess property rights. The reluctance to invoke property probably stems from fears of resurrecting slavery and the commodification of human beings. But ironically, avoidance of property transforms the subjects of human research into objects that can be owned only by others, resulting in new forms of oppression and exploitation. Human research subjects are autonomous individuals who should not only possess the power to contribute their biological materials, but also the right to help control the course of research, and to share in the resulting benefits or profits. Conferring body property might enable research subjects to regain power and a measure of self-sovereignty.

scholarly journals Ethics in Research with Human Subjects - A Brief Review

1970 ◽  
pp. 24-26
Author(s):  
Md Uzire Azam Khan ◽  
Md Ruhul Amin ◽  
Firoza Begum ◽  
Momotaz Begum
Keyword(s):  
Human Subjects ◽  
Basic Research ◽  
Research Protocol ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Nuremberg Code ◽  
Benefit Ratio ◽  
Subject Selection ◽  
Independent Review ◽  
Ethics In Research ◽  
Guide Lines

Ethics in research involving humans were first codified in 1946 as Nuremberg code. Subsequently other ethical declarations and guide lines were developed to protect the research participants as well as the researchers. The basic research bioethics includes three principles-respects for person, beneficence, and justice. To make a research with human subjects ethically sound the research protocol should have social and scientific values, fair subject selection, favorable risk benefit ratio, independent review, and informed consent of and respect for the participants. Above all the researcher should be honest and responsible enough to safeguard the rights and welfare of the research subjects. DOI: 10.3329/bjpp.v24i1.5734Bangladesh J Physiol Pharmacol 2008; 24(1&2) : 24-26

The Ethical Challenges of Animal Research

2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 391-406 ◽  
Author(s):  
HOPE R. FERDOWSIAN ◽  
JOHN P. GLUCK
Keyword(s):  
England Journal ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
New England ◽  
Animal Research ◽  
Ethical Challenges ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Human Research ◽  
Ethical Justification ◽  
Influential Paper ◽  
Moral Problems

Abstract:In 1966, Henry K. Beecher published an article entitled “Ethics and Clinical Research” in the New England Journal of Medicine, which cited examples of ethically problematic human research. His influential paper drew attention to common moral problems such as inadequate attention to informed consent, risks, and efforts to provide ethical justification. Beecher’s paper provoked significant advancements in human research policies and practices. In this paper, we use an approach modeled after Beecher’s 1966 paper to show that moral problems with animal research are similar to the problems Beecher described for human research. We describe cases that illustrate ethical deficiencies in the conduct of animal research, including inattention to the issue of consent or assent, incomplete surveys of the harms caused by specific protocols, inequitable burdens on research subjects in the absence of benefits to them, and insufficient efforts to provide ethical justification. We provide a set of recommendations to begin to address these deficits.

Nanomedicine First-in-Human Research: Challenges for Informed Consent

2012 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 823-830 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy M. P. King
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
Clinical Research ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Consent Form ◽  
Human Research ◽  
Research Challenges ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Human Subjects Protections

First-in-human (FIH) research has several characteristics that require special attention with respect to ethics and human subjects protections. At least some nanomedical technologies may also have characteristics that merit special attention in clinical research, as other papers in this symposium show. This paper considers how to address these characteristics in the consent form and process for FIH nanomedicine research, focusing principally on experimental nanotherapeutic interventions but also considering nanodiagnostic interventions.It is essential, as a starting point, to recognize that the consent form and process are by no means the primary protectors of human subjects (although they are sometimes so regarded). Instead, consideration of the form and content of informed consent becomes relevant only after a clinical trial has been reviewed and deemed scientifically and ethically acceptable.Two convergent types of challenges to informed consent are posed by nanomedicine FIH research. First, some issues appear generally applicable to FIH research, but have specific nanomedicine implications.

scholarly journals Tuskegee Syphilis Study of 1932–1973 and the Rise of Bioethics as Shown Through Government Documents and Actions

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 11
Author(s):  
Laura A. Barrett
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Medical Studies ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Tuskegee Syphilis Study ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Government Documents ◽  
Science Community

One government source regarding clinical trials is Clinicaltrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov), which is available to health information seekers as a resource to find information about past, current, and recruiting clinical trials. Currently, if you participate in a clinical trial you are required to provide your “informed consent.” This means you have been informed of the risks, benefits, purpose of the study, and your rights. This information is provided to you so that you, as the potential participant, can make an informed decision before deciding whether or not to participate. If you work with or in research, you will become very familiar with the term IRB, which stands for “Institutional Review Board.” An IRB is a panel intended to oversee the entire scope of one or more medical research studies including protecting the rights and welfare of human research subjects. Although it may seem like common sense that these two things are necessary, there was a time when they did not exist. A new approach to bioethics and the regulation of clinical trials and medical studies using living human subjects came about from public and governmental outrage over one study, known as the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. By looking specifically at this case, which led to the rise of bioethics at the federal-government level in the 1970s, the origin of IRBs and informed consent as they relate to medical studies and human subjects will be illuminated. The issues of IRBs, informed consent, and bioethics are important in the library and information science community because we often interact with a public that is impacted by the policies and regulations related to these issues. In addition, we are the very researchers, or hold relationships with researchers, that are held to the strict standards set in place by IRBs and bioethics in general.

scholarly journals Informed consent of human subjects: a review

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-35
Author(s):  
Mohammad Rashedul Islam
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Consent Form ◽  
Clear Understanding ◽  
Human Research ◽  
Vital Part

Informed consent is a vital part of the research process, and as such entails more than obtaining a signature on the consent form. Researchers or investigators must educate potential subjects to ensure that they can reach a truly informed decision about whether or not to participate in the research. Their consent must be given freely, without coercion, and must be based on a clear understanding of what participation involves. Only then it can be regarded as ‘informed consent’. Although a relatively recent phenomenon, the role of informed consent in human research is central to its ethical regulation and conduct. However, guidelines often recommend procedures for obtaining informed consent (usually written consent) that are difficult to implement in developing countries. This paper reviews the guidelines for obtaining informed consent and also discusses prevailing views on current controversies, ambiguities and problems with these guidelines and suggests potential solutions. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/bioethics.v5i1.18444 Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 2014 Vol.5(1): 20-35

Beyond Human Subjects: Risk, Ethics, and Clinical Development of Nanomedicines

2012 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 841-847 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Kimmelman
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Research ◽  
Research Ethics ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Clinical Development ◽  
Nuremberg Code ◽  
Human Research ◽  
Clinical Investigator ◽  
Nazi Doctors ◽  
Personal Interests

Like all policies, contemporary human research policies are the product of their history. The scandals and traumas motivating their creation — the Nazi doctors trials, Tuskegee, the Milgram experiment on obedience — however different in their particulars, all share a common narrative: a scientist, pursuing valued social ends, runs roughshod over the personal interests of disadvantaged human subjects. From the Nuremberg code through the latest revisions of the Declaration of Helsinki, research ethics policies have sought to erect a sphere of protection around the latter.As a consequence of this history, all major policies start with a well-rehearsed model of human investigations. Clinical research is viewed as an encounter between investigators and volunteers. The clinical investigator is given certain duties. The human volunteer has certain moral entitlements. What is ethically at stake in human investigations inheres in the nature and quality of the interactions between investigators and volunteers. These interactions involve an asymmetry because the investigator has privileged knowledge and influence.

Medical Research Ethics: What We Need to Comply When Obtaining Informed Consent from Human Subjects?

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 271-276
Author(s):  
CSK Tay
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
Medical Ethics ◽  
Clinical Research ◽  
Medical Research ◽  
Research Ethics ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Medical Research Ethics

Patient safety and well-being are very important to safeguard in medical research. A subject's life cannot be sacrificed for the benefits of future mankind, as medical ethics of autonomy dictate the respect of an individual. By reference to the Declaration of Helsinki, this article discusses the ethical principles and processes in obtaining a valid and proper informed consent from the research subjects who should freely consent and voluntarily participate in the clinical research, including the ‘contents’ of the informed consent and the ‘skills’ of obtaining informed consent.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document