Authors
L. Syd M Johnson
SUNY Upstate Medical University
Adam Shriver
Drake University
Abstract
:Human and animal research both operate within established standards. In the United States, criticism of the human research environment and recorded abuses of human research subjects served as the impetus for the establishment of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, and the resulting Belmont Report. The Belmont Report established key ethical principles to which human research should adhere: respect for autonomy, obligations to beneficence and justice, and special protections for vulnerable individuals and populations. While current guidelines appropriately aim to protect the individual interests of human participants in research, no similar, comprehensive, and principled effort has addressed the use of animals in research. Although published policies regarding animal research provide relevant regulatory guidance, the lack of a fundamental effort to explore the ethical issues and principles that should guide decisions about the potential use of animals in research has led to unclear and disparate policies. Here, we explore how the ethical principles outlined in the Belmont Report could be applied consistently to animals. We describe how concepts such as respect for autonomy and obligations to beneficence and justice could be applied to animals, as well as how animals are entitled to special protections as a result of their vulnerability.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/s0963180119001130
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,091
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Rethinking the Belmont Report?Phoebe Friesen, Lisa Kearns, Barbara Redman & Arthur L. Caplan - 2017 - American Journal of Bioethics 17 (7):15-21.
Revisiting the Belmont Report.Wesley J. Smith - 2001 - Hastings Center Report 31 (2):5-5.
Autonomy and Informed Consent: A Mistaken Association? [REVIEW]Sigurdur Kristinsson - 2007 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 10 (3):253-264.
How the Belmont Report Fails.Richard B. Miller - 2003 - Essays in Philosophy 4 (2):6.
The Belmont Report.Tom L. Beauchamp - 2008 - In Ezekiel J. Emanuel (ed.), The Oxford Textbook of Clinical Research Ethics. Oxford University Press. pp. 149--55.
Vulnerable Populations in Research: The Case of the Seriously Ill.Philip J. Nickel - 2006 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (3):245-264.
Erratum.[author unknown] - 2018 - Hastings Center Report 48 (3):4-4.
Erratum.[author unknown] - 2019 - Hastings Center Report 49 (2):8-8.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-10-30

Total views
15 ( #697,656 of 2,506,107 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #416,984 of 2,506,107 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes