Jan Piasecki
Jagiellonian University Medical College
A child’s objection, refusal and dissent regarding participation in non-beneficial biomedical research must be respected, even when the parents or legal representatives have given their permission. There is, however, no consensus on the definition and criteria of a meaningful and valid child’s objection. The aim of this article is to clarify this issue. In the first part we describe the problems of a child’s assent in research. In the second part we distinguish and analyze two models of a child’s objection to research: the capacity-based model and the distress-based model. In the last part we present arguments for a broader and unified understanding of a child’s objection within regulations and practices. This will strengthen children’s rights and facilitate the entire process of assessment of research protocols.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11019-015-9643-8
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: 68,916
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Supererogation.David Heyd - 2009 - Cambridge University Press.

View all 20 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Non-Human Primates: The Appropriate Subjects of Biomedical Research?M. Quigley - 2007 - Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (11):655-658.
Learning to Care‐‐The Development of Empathy.Lisa Kuhmerker - 1975 - Journal of Moral Education 5 (1):25-33.
Moral Distress.Caroline Ong - 2015 - Chisholm Health Ethics Bulletin 20 (4):12.


Added to PP index

Total views
23 ( #489,606 of 2,497,779 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #428,370 of 2,497,779 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes