| Description |
1 online resource (481 p.) |
| Contents |
Intro -- Half-Title -- Title -- Copyright -- Dedication -- Contents -- Preface -- Acknowledgments -- Epigraph -- PART I: DOES RESEARCH ETHICS REST ON A MISTAKE? -- 1. Introduction -- 1.1 Neglected Foundations -- 1.2 Eight Problematic Commitments -- 1.2.1 An Inherent Dilemma -- 1.2.2 From Social Imperative to Private Transaction -- 1.2.3 Two Main Stakeholders -- 1.2.4 Research as Functional Role -- 1.2.5 Two Dogmas of Research Ethics -- 1.2.6 Paternalistic Foundations -- 1.2.7 Justice without Social Institutions -- 1.2.8 Reducing Justice to Mutually Beneficial Agreements |
|
1.3 The Common Good and a Just Social Order -- 1.3.1 The Basic Interest Conception of the Common Good -- 1.3.2 Free and Equal Persons -- 1.3.3 Reconnecting to Social Institutions -- 1.3.4 Producing a Unique Public Good -- 1.4 The Egalitarian Research Imperative -- 1.5 The Integrative Approach to Risk Assessment -- 1.5.1 Dissolving the Dilemma -- 1.5.2 The Principle of Equal Concern -- 1.5.3 Integrating Equal Concern and Social Value -- 1.6 Non-.Paternalistic Research Ethics -- 1.7 Justice and the Human Development Approach to International Research -- 1.8 Conclusion |
|
2. Fear of the Common Good and the Neglect of Justice -- 2.1 The Practical and Conceptual Origins of Parochialism -- 2.2 The Peril of Larger Social Purposes -- 2.2.1 Research as a Progressive Undertaking -- 2.2.2 Two Sides to the Ledger of Progress -- 2.2.3 Permission to "Play God" -- 2.2.4 The Arbitrary Judgments of Men -- 2.2.5 Fear of Moral Decay -- 2.3 From Social Imperative to Private Undertaking -- 2.3.1 Severing Research from the Common Good -- 2.3.2 An Optional Goal -- 2.3.3 Frustration without a Viable Alternative -- 2.4 Functional Characterization of Research |
|
2.4.1 Practical Influences on Research Ethics -- 2.4.2 The Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital Case -- 2.4.3 The Tuskegee Syphilis Study -- 2.4.4 Research versus Treatment -- 2.4.5 The Ecosystem of Paternalism -- 2.5 Justice: The Last Virtue of Research Ethics -- 2.5.1 Justice Untethered -- 2.5.2 The Consequences of Neglect -- 2.5.3 Minimalism about Justice: Reducing It to Beneficence and Autonomy -- 2.5.4 Requirements without Grounds -- 2.5.5 Protectionism and Neglect -- 2.6 International Research Stresses Fault Lines -- 2.6.1 The Zidovudine Short-.Course Controversy |
|
2.6.2 Two Distinctions and Four Standards of Care -- 2.6.3 The Role-.Related Obligations of Clinicians -- 2.6.4 Problems for the Global De Jure Standard of Care -- 2.6.5 Not Just a Problem for International Research -- 2.6.6 Research Unmoored from a Just Social Order -- 2.6.7 Responsiveness and Reasonable Availability -- 2.6.8 The Surfaxin Case -- 2.6.9 Minimalism about Justice -- 2.7 Conclusion -- 3. The Anvil of Neglect and the Hammer of Exploitation: Fault Lines in Research Ethics -- 3.1 Three Moral Pitfalls -- 3.2 The Targets of PPE -- 3.2.1 Norms of Respect |
| Summary |
Alex John London defends a conception of the common good that grounds a moral imperative with two requirements. The first is to promote research that enables key social institutions to effectively, efficiently and equitably safeguard the basic interests of individuals. The second is to ensure that research is organized as a voluntary scheme of social cooperation that respects its various contributors' moral claim to be treated as free and equal. Connecting research to the goals of a just social order grounds a framework for assessing and managing research risk that reconciles these requirement |
| Notes |
Description based upon print version of record |
|
3.2.2 Responsiveness, Reasonable Availability, and the Standard of Care |
| Subject |
Medical ethics -- Philosophy
|
|
Research -- Moral and ethical aspects.
|
|
Medical ethics -- Philosophy
|
|
Research -- Moral and ethical aspects
|
| Form |
Electronic book
|
| ISBN |
9780197534854 |
|
0197534856 |
|
