H.M. Evans
“Should patients be allowed to veto their participation in clinical research?”
Evans, H.M.
Authors
Abstract
Patients participating in the shared benefits of publicly funded health care enjoy the benefits of treatments tested on previous patients. Future patients similarly depend on treatments tested on present patients. Since properly designed research assumes that the treatments being studied are—so far as is known at the outset—equivalent in therapeutic value, no one is clinically disadvantaged merely by taking part in research, provided the research involves administering active treatments to all participants. This paper argues that, because no other practical or moral considerations count decisively against so doing, we could and should oblige patients to agree to receive indicated treatment within the terms of any concurrent research protocols. This ensures their treatment will benefit not only themselves but also future patients through contributing to new knowledge. By analogy with the paying of income tax, patients should not be allowed to "veto" their social responsibility to take part in clinical research.
Citation
Evans, H. (2004). “Should patients be allowed to veto their participation in clinical research?”. Journal of Medical Ethics, 30(4), 198-203. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2003.002444
Journal Article Type | Article |
---|---|
Publication Date | 2004-04 |
Deposit Date | Apr 3, 2007 |
Publicly Available Date | Nov 10, 2009 |
Journal | Journal of Medical Ethics |
Print ISSN | 0306-6800 |
Electronic ISSN | 1473-4257 |
Publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
Peer Reviewed | Peer Reviewed |
Volume | 30 |
Issue | 4 |
Pages | 198-203 |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2003.002444 |
Keywords | Clinical research, Consent, Equipoise, Research subjects, Veto. |
Files
Published Journal Article
(108 Kb)
PDF
You might also like
Music in body and imagination
(2018)
Book Chapter
Introduction
(2016)
Book Chapter
Epilogue
(2016)
Book Chapter
Medical Humanities and the Place of Wonder
(2016)
Book Chapter