Report on the National Commission: Good as Gold [Book Review]

Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 8 (6):4-4 (1980)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Bio-medical and Behavioral Research ended its work by substantially endorsing the status quo which places primary reliance on local Institutional Review Boards for subject protection. This was predictable because of the commission's researcher-dominated composition which permitted it to assume that(1) research is good;(2) experimentation is almost never harmful to subjects; and (3) researcher-dominated IRBs can adequately protect the interests of human subjects. The successor Presidential Commission can learn much by reexamining these premises

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1111/j.1748-720x.1980.tb00620.x

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,497

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

The Ethical Analysis of Risks and Potential Benefits in Human Subjects Research: History, Theory, and Implications for U.S. Regulation.Charles Weijer - unknown
The spanish code for good corporate governance (olivencia report): An ethical analysis. [REVIEW]J. Félix Lozano - 2000 - Journal of Business Ethics 27 (1-2):175 - 180.
The National Bioethics Advisory Commission: contributing to public policy.Elisa Eiseman - 2003 - Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
National Systems of Innovation, BICON Final Report, European Commission Framework 4, Targetted Socio-Economic Research.Ruth McNally - unknown
Values, Obligations, and Virtues: Approaches to Bio-Medical Ethics.Thomas W. Ogletree - 1976 - Journal of Religious Ethics 4 (1):105 - 130.
Universal ethical principles in a diverse universe: A commentary on Monshi and Zieglmayer's case study.James M. DuBois - 2004 - Ethics and Behavior 14 (4):313 – 319.
Implementing human rights in the Pacific through the work of national human rights institutions: The experience of fiji.Catherine Renshaw, Andrew C. Byrnes & Andrea Durbach - unknown
Promises and perils of public deliberation: Contrasting two national bioethics commissions on embryonic stem cell research.Cynthia B. Cohen - 2005 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 15 (3):269-288.
National Policy on CAM: The White House Commission Report.Kathleen M. Boozang - 2003 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 31 (2):251-261.
Global Health Governance: Commission on Social Determinants of Health and the Imperative for Change.Ruth Bell, Sebastian Taylor & Michael Marmot - 2010 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 38 (3):470-485.
Ethics, regulation, and biomedical research.Matthew Weed - 2004 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14 (4):361-368.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-24

Downloads
44 (#364,497)

6 months
4 (#799,256)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Building the Next Bioethics Commission.Alexander M. Capron - 2017 - Hastings Center Report 47 (S1):4-9.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Clarifying the Concepts of Research Ethics.Robert J. Levine - 1979 - Hastings Center Report 9 (3):21-26.
Ten Ways to Improve IRBs.John A. Robertson - 1979 - Hastings Center Report 9 (1):29-33.
Research on Human Subjects.Bernard Barber - 1979 - Transaction Publishers.

Add more references