Payment in challenge studies from an economics perspective

Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (12):831-832 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

We largely agree with Grimwade et al ’s1 conclusion that challenge trial participants may ethically be paid, including for risk. Here, we add further arguments, clarify some points from the perspective of economics and indicate areas where economists can support the development of a framework for ethically justifiable payment. Our arguments apply to carefully constructed and monitored controlled human infection model trials that have been appropriately reviewed and approved. Participants in medical studies perform a service. Outside the domain of research participation, there is nearly universal agreement that workers providing a service should be compensated fairly, and that work involving more discomfort and risk should be compensated more generously. Accordingly, labour regulations impose floors, not caps on compensation. Caps, even if intended to protect against undue inducement, also raise concerns about illegal price-fixing that disadvantages workers. Such limits on payment for egg donors have successfully been challenged in court.i Moreover, caps on compensation may harm everyone at risk of infection, not just potential participants. Insufficient compensation may impede the recruitment of enough suitable subjects, for example, when representativeness of the subject sample is required. Delays in vaccine development not only prolong disruption of social, educational and economic activity but also lead to excess infections and deaths. Unlike paid CHIM participants, individuals exposed to such infection do not accept it voluntarily, are not compensated for it, and are unlikely to receive the level of medical supervision afforded to closely monitored CHIM participants. Payment caps can lead to attempts to circumvent the regulation. For example, many countries …

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,283

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

On the question, “what is law?”.David Howarth - 2000 - Res Publica 6 (3):259-283.
Prospective payment and medical ethics.Charles E. Begley - 1987 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 12 (2):107-122.
Economics from a trinitarian perspective.Lans Bovenberg - 2013 - Philosophia Reformata 78 (2):102-107.
Payments to research subjects.Martin Wilkinson - 2005 - Monash Bioethics Review 24 (1):S70-S77.
The Corrosion of Gold In Light of Modern Christian Economics.Domenic Marbaniang - 2013 - Journal of the Contemporary Christian 5 (1):61-76.
The Ethics of Payments: Paper, Plastic, or Bitcoin?James J. Angel & Douglas McCabe - 2015 - Journal of Business Ethics 132 (3):603-611.
Increasing the amount of payment to research subjects.D. B. Resnick - 2008 - Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (9):e14-e14.
Laboratory Experimentation in Economics.Alvin E. Roth - 1986 - Economics and Philosophy 2 (2):245-273.
On the Question, “What is Law?”.Howarth David - 2000 - Res Publica 6 (3):259-283.
Realistic realism about unrealistic models.Uskali Mäki - 2009 - In Harold Kincaid & Don Ross (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Economics. Oxford University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-10-29

Downloads
18 (#837,247)

6 months
10 (#276,689)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?