Freedom as non-domination in behavioral and biomedical research

Research Ethics 14 (3):1-15 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In the biomedical and behavioral sciences, it is widely recognized that researchers conducting studies involving human participants must respect the autonomy of research subjects. There is significant debate in the clinical research ethics and bioethics literatures about what it means for an individual to be autonomous. According to proponents of the Liberal Conception of Autonomy, an autonomous person is an agent who has interests and opinions and the capacity to deliberate about them. In contrast, proponents of the Relational Conception of Autonomy argue that because humans are social creatures, autonomy is a relational concept and ought to be recognized as such by medical professionals. In this article, I argue that the LCA/RCA debate is flawed, and that the notion of freedom as non-domination, rather than autonomy, ought to be adopted for biomedical research ethics policies regarding informed consent and research agenda-setting. I then argue that this view of freedom should also be adopted...

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

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

Impunity and domination: A puzzle for republicanism.Robert B. Talisse - 2014 - European Journal of Political Theory 13 (2):121-131.
Beyond non-domination.Sharon R. Krause - 2013 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 39 (2):187-208.
Reconstructing republican freedom.Michael J. Thompson - 2013 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 39 (3):277-298.
Broader contexts of non-domination: Pettit and Hegel on freedom and recognition.Arto Laitinen - 2015 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 18 (4):390-406.
Republican freedom and the rule of law.Christian List - 2006 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 5 (2):201-220.
Freedom as Independence.Christian List & Laura Valentini - 2016 - Ethics 126 (4):1043–1074.
Rhetoric and Research Ethics: An Answer to Annas. [REVIEW]Albert R. Jonsen & Michael Yesley - 1980 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 8 (6):8-13.
Rhetoric and research ethics: An answer to Annas.Albert R. Jonsen & Michael Yesley - 1980 - Journal of Medical Humanities 2 (4):212-225.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-09-11

Downloads
25 (#616,937)

6 months
5 (#629,136)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Aidan Kestigian
Harvard University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Principles of biomedical ethics.Tom L. Beauchamp - 1994 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by James F. Childress.
The morality of freedom.J. Raz - 1988 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 178 (1):108-109.
No longer patient: feminist ethics and health care.Susan Sherwin - 1992 - Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

View all 16 references / Add more references