Outsourcing Ethical Obligations: Should the Revised Common Rule Address the Responsibilities of Investigators and Sponsors?

Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 41 (2):397-410 (2013)

Abstract

The Common Rule creates a division of moral labor in research. It implies that investigators and sponsors can outsource their ethical obligations to IRBs and participants, thereby fostering a culture of compliance, rather than one of responsibility. The proposed revisions to the Common Rule are likely to exacerbate this problem. To harness the expressive power of the law, I propose the Common Rule be revised to include the ethical responsibilities of investigators and sponsors

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,805

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
2013-06-27

Downloads
27 (#428,197)

6 months
1 (#386,499)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Similar books and articles

The Moral Responsibilities of Stockholders.Richard J. Klonoski - 1986 - Journal of Business Ethics 5 (5):385 - 390.
New Rules for Research with Human Participants?Jessica Berg & Nicole Deming - 2011 - Hastings Center Report 41 (6):10-11.
Rule Consequentialism and the Problem of Partial Acceptance.Kevin Tobia - 2013 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (3):643-652.
Conflict of Interest and Medical Publication.Marcus M. Reidenberg - 2002 - Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (3):455-457.
What the ANPRM Missed: Additional Needs for IRB Reform.Charles W. Lidz & Suzanne Garverich - 2013 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 41 (2):390-396.