Article

Voluntariness of Consent to Research: A Conceptual Model

College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, USA.
The Hastings Center Report (Impact Factor: 1.08). 01/2009; 39(1):30-9. DOI: 10.1353/hcr.0.0103
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A good deal of policy and practice in human subjects research aims to ensure that when subjects consent to research, they do so voluntarily. To date, however, voluntariness and its impairment have been poorly conceptualized and studied. The legal doctrine of informed consent could provide a useful model.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Robert Klitzman, Jun 19, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
108 Views
  • Source
    • "A preliminary empirical investigation into the voluntariness of consent to research demonstrated that participants indicated that " trust in the people doing the research . . . [was] frequently cited as important motivations across all categories of respondents " as a reason for research participation (Appelbaum, Lidz, and Klitzman 2009). "
    The American Journal of Bioethics 03/2010; 10(3):18-9. DOI:10.1080/15265160903581783 · 2.45 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Everyone agrees that subjects in human research should be free, uncovered volunteers, fully aware of the study and its risk. Sometimes this is much easier to say than to do (14, 15). Informing mentally intact medical subjects is largely a matter of defining unfamiliar terms. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Concerns regarding ethics of psychiatric research were a critical point in research when lots of news was announced about human rights abuses in the Nazi Germany. However, even nowadays, psychiatric research involving people suffering from different types of psychiatric disorders can still be distorted and, rather than fulfilling its promise of improved understanding of psychiatric disorder and its treatment, can result in serious harm to patients who participated in these investigations. This review focuses on some important ethical aspects in psychiatric research.
    05/2009; 2:5.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: One moot point in bioethical debates about genetic testing concerns the conditions that have to be fulfilled to make individual genetic testing or individual participation in genetic screening programs truly voluntary. Though there is a relatively broad consensus about the non-viability of views on the extremes of the spectrum of opinions, there is considerable disagreement in the middle. This mirrors the difficulties in defining satisfactory demarcation lines between autonomous choice, pressured choice and coercion in cases in which the decision to participate is triggered, wholly or partly, by factors such as material incentives, urgent health needs, massive social expectations, or moral pressure from relatives. In this contribution, some of the semantic conditions and ethical principles concerning coercion are explored with a view to applying them to genetic testing, especially in the context of insurance and participation in clinical trials.
    Medicine Studies 06/2009; 1(2):95-104. DOI:10.1007/s12376-009-0012-x
Show more