A Walk in the Park: A Case Study in Research Ethics

University of Connecticut Health Center, USA.
The Journal of Law Medicine &amp Ethics (Impact Factor: 1.1). 02/2009; 37(1):93-103. DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2009.00354.x
Source: PubMed


Can researchers, interested in novel ways to assess HIV seroprevalence among populations which are otherwise hidden, collect condoms that have been discarded on the ground in a public sex environment and test them for HIV? Researchers, who use other types of abandoned samples, such as discarded syringes, hair or saliva samples, or excess biological samples, confront similar issues. This review evaluates whether such abandoned tissues can be studied based on U.S. Code of Federal Regulations and literature on related issues including: research involving banked tissues, blinded seroprevalence studies, and property claims that individuals might make on the samples. It also addresses broader questions of potential for stigma and risk to individuals and communities. The article concludes that the research should be permitted legally because either it does not involve human subjects, or it satisfies the requirements for waiver of consent; and that the research should also be permitted because the ethical principal of avoiding harm to individuals is fully satisfied based on a careful reading of the lessons of the tissue bank, biological property rights, and blinded seroprevalence study debates, as well as a consideration of other potential harms that might be involved.

7 Reads
  • Source
    • "Informational risks may arise for subjects even after the research is complete, through publication or other dissemination of the research (Denzin 2008; Taylor and Fox 2008). Researchers are asked to address the possibility that the publication and dissemination of their research results may stigmatize participants or the groups they associate with and to minimize possible stigmatizing work (Lazzarini et al. 2009; Wjst 2010). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: While public administration research is thriving because of increased attention to social scientific rigor, lingering problems of methods and ethics remain. This article investigates the reporting of ethics approval within public administration publications. Beginning with an overview of ethics requirements regarding research with human participants, I turn to an examination of human participants protections for public administration research. Next, I present the findings of my analysis of articles published in the top five public administration journals over the period from 2000 to 2012, noting the incidences of ethics approval reporting as well as funding reporting. In explicating the importance of ethics reporting for public administration research, as it relates to replication, reputation, and vulnerable populations, I conclude with recommendations for increasing ethics approval reporting in public administration research.
    Science and Engineering Ethics 03/2014; 20(1):77-97. DOI:10.1007/s11948-013-9436-5 · 0.96 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The use of human blood and tissue is critical to biomedical research. A number of treaties, laws, and regulations help to guide the ethical collection of these specimens. However, there are no clearly defined regulations regarding the ownership of human tissue specimens and who can control their fate. This review discusses the existing regulations governing human studies and the necessary components of patient consent. Legal cases that have addressed the issue of ownership of human tissue are reviewed, including recent settlements that have led to the destruction of millions of specimens of patient tissue. The unique regulations that guide the use of tissues collected postmortem are also examined. Potential changes in the future of biomedical research that uses human tissue, including genetic material, are also discussed. The use of human tissue is directed by numerous laws and regulations. Awareness of these rules and of how and when to obtain meaningful informed consent from patients is essential for laboratorians and researchers, who should also be familiar with situations that have led to lawsuits and in some cases the destruction of valuable human tissue specimens.
    Clinical Chemistry 11/2010; 56(11):1675-82. DOI:10.1373/clinchem.2010.150672 · 7.91 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The issues of ownership of human tissue and individuals’ consent for its use in research are of national importance. Three influential court cases have determined that individuals do not retain a property interest in research tissues. The issue currently in question is what degree of individual understanding and informed consent is appropriate to both protect researchers from lawsuits for their use of human tissue in research, while simultaneously providing individuals and groups of individuals with the appropriate degree of understanding and informed consent. We present a 2-tiered approach that might resolve this issue.
    Pathology Case Reviews 07/2012; 17(4):164-166. DOI:10.1097/PCR.0b013e318267517d

Similar Publications