Ethics Governance
Ethics & Governance - Resources and Articles |
| Articles indexes: a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | i | j | k | l | m | n | o | p | q | r | s | t | u | v | w | x | y | z | other | |
|
|
| Article - Abstract. To view full article click on the article title. | |
eMJA: Loff & Black, The Declaration of Helsinki and research in vulnerable populations Ethics The Declaration of Helsinki and research in vulnerable populations Bebe Loff and Jim Black Mooted changes to the Declaration on the agenda of the World Medical Association have sparked a vigorous debate on international research issues. The medical, research and ethics communities in Australia need to participate more broadly in this debate. MJA 2000; 172: 292-295For editorial comment, see Stockhausen The Nuremberg Code, which was formulated to prevent a recurrence of the horrific medical experiments carried out on humans during World War II, is unwavering in its commitment to the primacy of the human subject. It states that any person who is a research participant "should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice" and that "(t)he experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature."1 The Declaration of Helsinki2 was the World Medical Association's (WMA's) response to the Nuremberg Code and its goal was to safeguard research subjects. However, in declaring the need to weigh the importance of the research objective against the risk to the subject (Article I.4), the Declaration was seen as a subtle retreat from the Code.3 Some fear that changes to the Declaration currently under consideration by the WMA would substantially "water down" the basic principles of ethical human research. The Declaration does not specifically deal with international collaborations. Full Article: http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/172_06_200300/loff/loff.html |
|
2006 Ethics-Governance.com |
|||