Is it in a neonate's best interest to enter a randomised controlled trial?

Journal of Medical Ethics 27 (2):110-113 (2001)

Abstract

Clinicians are required to act in the best interest of neonates.However, it is not obvious that entry into a randomised controlled trial (RCT) is in a neonate’s best interest because such trials often involve additional onerous procedures (such as intramuscular injections) in return for which the neonate receives unproven treatment or a placebo.On the other hand, neonatology needs to develop its evidence base, and RCTs are central to this task. The solution posited here is based on two points. First, “best interest” is not equivalent to “the best possible interest” only to “best interest within a certain realm”. The realm of deliberation when asking the title question is the neonate’s health. Deliberating in this realm may involve the exclusion from consideration of some factors that might be thought relevant (such as parental wealth). Furthermore, circumstances may dictate the need to deliberate on other factors that might be thought irrelevant (such as health care resources). Second, deciding on a neonate’s best interest does not involve “putting oneself in its shoes”. Rather, it involves asking in what it has an interest, or stake. These will include some things in which we all, as human beings, have a stake, such as medical progress. Putting these two points together, in the realm of health the answer to whether RCT entry is in a neonate’s best interest is usually very finely balanced. Where this is the case, it is reasonable to invoke a broader notion of best interest and include a broader range of elements in which the neonate has a stake, including medical progress. In this way RCT entry can, usually, be said to be in a neonate’s best interest. (Journal of Medical Ethics 2001;27:110–113) Keywords: Neonates; randomised controlled trials; best interest; ethics

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,694

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-24

Downloads
25 (#460,684)

6 months
1 (#388,319)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Peter Allmark
University of Leeds (PhD)

References found in this work

Toward an Ethic of Ambiguity.John D. Arras - 1984 - Hastings Center Report 14 (2):25-33.
Medical Research with Children: Ethics, Law and Practice.G. Clayden - 1986 - Journal of Medical Ethics 12 (3):156-157.
MRC Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice in Clinical Trials.D. Vere - 1999 - Journal of Medical Ethics 25 (3):280-281.
Placebos in Clinical Practice and Research.P. P. De Deyn & R. D'Hooge - 1996 - Journal of Medical Ethics 22 (3):140-146.

Add more references

Similar books and articles

The Human Face of Self-Interest.Ian Maitland - 2002 - Journal of Business Ethics 38 (1-2):3 - 17.
Crying and Tears Mimic the Neonate.Frans L. Roes - 2004 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (4):472-472.
The Need for Randomised Controlled Trials in Educational Research.Carole J. Torgerson & David J. Torgerson - 2001 - British Journal of Educational Studies 49 (3):316 - 328.
The Importance of Self-Interest and Public Interest in Politics.Dennis C. Mueller - 2011 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 23 (3):321-338.
Nursing the Neonate.Y. Freer - 1999 - Journal of Medical Ethics 25 (6):554-554.