Prisoners as Living Organ Donors

2021 ◽  
pp. 124-144
Author(s):  
Lainie Friedman ◽  
J. Richard Thistlethwaite, Jr
Keyword(s):  
Living Donor ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Living Donors ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Department Of Justice ◽  
Federal Bureau Of Prisons ◽  
The Us ◽  
Human Research Subjects ◽  
Special Case ◽  
Human Subjects Protections

This chapter considers the special case in which a prisoner seeks to serve as a living donor and what lessons can be learned from human subjects protections for research participants given that both activities are done with the primary goal to benefit third parties. In the federal regulations that codify human subjects protections in the US (45 CFR 46), there are additional protections enumerated for research on prisoners. Current Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Prisons policy allows prisoners to serve as living donors but only for first-degree relatives. This chapter describes what special considerations should be assessed for prisoners to ethically serve as potential living donors using a vulnerabilities approach adapted from the human research subjects protection literature. The donor transplant team (living donor advocacy team) needs both a living donor advocate and a prisoner liaison to ensure that the potential prisoner-donor satisfactorily addresses the vulnerabilities faced by prisoners.

IRB Creep: Federal Regulations Protecting Human Research Subjects and Increasing Instructors' Responsibilities

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane A. Riordan ◽  
Michael P. Riordan
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Institutional Review Boards ◽  
Federal Regulations ◽  
Federally Funded ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Accounting Faculty ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Human Research Subjects ◽  
Review Boards

ABSTRACT: Federal regulations require oversight of federally sponsored research involving human subjects. Universities have responded by forming Institutional Review Boards (IRBs). Although these regulations only apply to federally funded projects, universities have extended the oversight to include all projects involving human subjects. From our own experience, we observe that not all accounting faculty are aware of their responsibilities to their local boards. The sanctions for failing to follow required procedures depend on the infraction, and range from an order to cease work on the project to termination of university service for the faculty member and expulsion for the student. This report helps accounting faculty understand how the review process may affect their role as instructors and serves as encouragement to them to become familiar with the requirements of local review boards.

The Institutional Review Board and Protecting Human Subjects: 10 Frequently Asked Questions

2005 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-295
Author(s):  
Sheldon Zink ◽  
Laura Kimberly ◽  
Stacey Wertlieb
Keyword(s):  
Human Subjects ◽  
Institutional Review Board ◽  
Institutional Review Boards ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Human Research ◽  
Institutional Review Board Approval ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Human Research Subjects ◽  
Review Boards

It is essential that anyone involved in research involving human subjects be familiar with the purpose and role of institutional review boards. Institutional review boards are designed, first and foremost, to protect human research subjects by overseeing the implementation of federal regulations regarding protection of human subjects. The federal government requires institutional review board approval for any human subject research that receives federal funding, and many scholarly journals require proof of institutional review board approval of the research before publication. In this article, the answers to 10 frequently asked questions about the role of institutional review boards highlight the important contributions made by institutional review boards to the conduct of ethically sound research. The aim is to generate a working knowledge of the institutional review board's function that can be used by every researcher contemplating working with human research subjects. This is the first in a series of 3 articles examining common issues in research ethics.

scholarly journals ORGANIZATIONAL AND LEGAL ASPECTS OF WITNESS PROTECTION IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 162-167
Author(s):  
Гузель Каримова ◽  
Рим Каримов
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Federal Bureau ◽  
Department Of Justice ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Protective Measures ◽  
Federal Bureau Of Prisons ◽  
The Us

The article examines organizational and legal aspects of the implementation of the witness protection program in the United States. Special attention is paid to activities in this area of the US Department of Justice, the US Marshals Service, which directly provide protection for witnesses and the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Some statistics on witness protection are provided. Concrete protective measures and their application in relation to the participants in criminal proceedings are considered.

Teaching About Systemic Ethical Misconduct Increases Awareness of Ethical Principles: A Replication and Extension of Grose-Fifer’s (2017) Tuskegee Role-Play Activity

2021 ◽  
pp. 009862832110159
Author(s):  
Maya C. Rose ◽  
Jessica E. Brodsky ◽  
Elizabeth S. Che ◽  
Patricia J. Brooks
Keyword(s):  
Research Ethics ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Social Activism ◽  
Role Play ◽  
Public Health Research ◽  
Play Activity ◽  
Ethics Instruction ◽  
Ethical Misconduct ◽  
Unethical Research ◽  
Human Subjects Protections

Background: Introductory Psychology students rarely learn about unethical biomedical research outside the Tuskegee syphilis study, but these practices were widespread in U.S. public health research (e.g., at the Willowbrook State School researchers infected children with disabilities with hepatitis). Objectives: Replicate and extend Grose-Fifer’s research ethics activity by evaluating if an online homework and in-class role-play increased awareness of unethical research and abuses at Tuskegee (replication) and Willowbrook (extension) and subsequent changes in human subjects protections. Method: As homework, students read about the studies and wrote statements from perspectives of individuals involved. In class, students read their statements and discussed how outrage led to research conduct regulations. Online pre/posttests asked students why it was important to learn about both studies. Results: At posttest, students were more aware of unethical research at Willowbrook and that Tuskegee led to changes in human subjects protections. Students who completed the role-play activity were less likely to mention abuses for Tuskegee than students who did not participate. Conclusion: We were partially successful in replicating and extending Grose-Fifer. Teaching Implications: Research ethics instruction should draw attention to historical precedents and how public outrage and social activism led to increased protections for research participants.

Conflicts of Interest in Human Subject Research: The Insufficiency of U.S. and International Standards

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 303-330
Author(s):  
Marc A. Rodwin
Keyword(s):  
Federal Government ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Human Subject Research ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Legal Standards ◽  
Ineffective Efforts ◽  
Human Research Subjects ◽  
Current Standards

Researchers, as well as individuals and institutions that oversee their conduct, sometimes have conflicts of interest that weaken or render ineffective efforts to protect human research subjects. This article analyzes United States and international standards used to address conflicts of interest and reviews evidence regarding compliance. It finds current standards are insufficient and recommends that the federal government and international organizations adopt stronger legal standards that require resolving most significant conflicts of interest and specifying how to manage conflicts of interest not resolved.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document