Research Ethics 7 (4):120-131 (2011)

Abstract
For decades, scholars in the social sciences and humanities have questioned the appropriateness and utility of prior review of their research by human subjects' ethics committees. This essay seeks to organize thematically some of their published complaints and to serve as a brief restatement of the major critiques of ethics review. In particular, it argues that 1) ethics committees impose silly restrictions, 2) ethics review is a solution in search of a problem, 3) ethics committees lack expertise, 4) ethics committees apply inappropriate principles, 5) ethics review harms the innocent, and 6) better options exist
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1177/174701611100700402
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: 70,039
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

Streamlining Ethical Review.J. Millum & J. Menikoff - 2010 - Annals of Internal Medicine 153 (10):655-72.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

View all 26 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-11-02

Total views
10 ( #899,442 of 2,506,010 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #209,628 of 2,506,010 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes