Child’s objection to non-beneficial research: capacity and distress based models

Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 19 (1):65-70 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A child’s objection, refusal and dissent regarding participation in non-beneficial biomedical research must be respected, even when the parents or legal representatives have given their permission. There is, however, no consensus on the definition and criteria of a meaningful and valid child’s objection. The aim of this article is to clarify this issue. In the first part we describe the problems of a child’s assent in research. In the second part we distinguish and analyze two models of a child’s objection to research: the capacity-based model and the distress-based model. In the last part we present arguments for a broader and unified understanding of a child’s objection within regulations and practices. This will strengthen children’s rights and facilitate the entire process of assessment of research protocols.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,846

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Non-human primates: the appropriate subjects of biomedical research?M. Quigley - 2007 - Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (11):655-658.
Moral distress.Caroline Ong - 2015 - Chisholm Health Ethics Bulletin 20 (4):12.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-09-07

Downloads
31 (#515,349)

6 months
3 (#973,855)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Marcin Waligora
Jagiellonian University
Jan Piasecki
Jagiellonian University Medical College

References found in this work

Supererogation.David Heyd - 1982 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
Supererogation.Douglas N. Walton - 1985 - Noûs 19 (2):284-288.

View all 20 references / Add more references