introduction to ethics
DESCRIPTION
Introduction To EthicsTRANSCRIPT
path
An Introduction to Ethical Reasoning
EATG Ethics Training
December 8-9, 2005
path
Origin of Biomedical
Ethics
Origin of Biomedical
Ethics
path
What is Biomedical Ethics?
Ethics is a branch of philosophy that attempts to assist us in deciding what is right and wrong in human conduct
Ethical reasoning takes place whenever there is a need to provide moral reflection on a specific action or behavior, such as a research project or a procedure
The term “bio-medical ethics” was coined in the early 1970s to refer to the application of moral reasoning to vexing questions at the frontiers of biology and medicine
path
The Evolution of Research Ethics
Ethical review and bio-medical ethics evolved in response to a history of medical abuses
– Medical abuses by Nazi doctors (Nuremburg Trial and code of 1947)
– Public revelation of the Tuskegee syphilis study in 1974
These abuses prompted the creation of a series of norms, guidelines, and regulations to help guide the conduct of research
path
The Evolution of Research Guidelines
Nuremberg Code
Declaration of Helsinki
WHO/CIOMS
1947
1964
1993
UNAIDS Vaccine
Guidance
2000
European Commission
Directive
UgandaIndia
Brazil
2003
path
Limitations of Existing Guidance
Most have only persuasive force and are enforceable only via sanctions imposed by the professional association that created them
Some have been enshrined in national laws (e.g. US Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, Ethics Law in Denmark, Brazil and Uganda)
Several take conflicting positions
Few take into account the special circumstances that characterize externally sponsored research in developing countries (p. 54 Nuffield Council).
path
Ethics Committees: Review of Research
“Ethical review” is now a standard part of approval for most publicly funded scientific research involving human beings
Primary role is to protect people participating in research
– Scientific design and conduct of study– Care and protection of research participants– Community participation– Appropriate of informed consent– Confidentiality issues
path
The Art of “Doing Ethics”
The Art of “Doing Ethics”
path
Principles of Research Ethics
Research ethics rests on a set of fundamental ethical principles
These principles are the most fundamental unit of ethical analysis – all norms and guidelines derive from them
Nonetheless, like constitutions, ethical principles and guidelines need interpretation and debate
Different ethical principles can at times be in conflict
Ethics is not a formula, but a process of reflection and weighing of choices
path
Ethics is a process Not a rule
How decisions are arrived at is ethically relevant
Different conclusions may result from different ethical reviews of the same issue or proposal and each conclusion may be ethically reached
A conclusion is ethical not merely because of what has been decided but also because of the process of conscientious reflection and assessment by which it is reached
Whose voice is represented in the debate is also important
path
Core Ethical Principles
Belmont Report (1978)
– Respect for Persons•Autonomy•Protection of vulnerable or
persons with diminished capacity– Beneficence
•Maximizing benefits•Minimizing harms
– Justice
path
Respect for Persons
Autonomy, self-determination– Those capable of deliberation should
be treated with respect for their capacity for self determination
– Underlies requirement for “informed consent”
Special measures for the vulnerable– Those whose decision-making
capacity is impaired or diminished due to intrinsic factors or circumstance
path
Beneficence
Maximize possible benefits
Minimize possible harms or wrongs
This principle gives rise to norms requiring:
– On balance, the research should generate more good than harm
– Risks of research to be reasonable in light of the expected benefits
path
From Protectionism to Access
Traditionally, much of the debate over “beneficence” has focused on protecting research participants from harm
But a second major reason for ethical review is to ensure equitable distribution of the potential benefits of research
During the 1980s, emphasis in global ethics discourse shifted from concern with the potential harms of research to a demand for greater access to its benefits.
path
Justice
People should receive what is due to them
Benefits and risks of research should be fairly distributed
Research participants and sites should be fairly selected
path
An alternative Articulation of Core Ethical Principles
The duty to alleviate suffering The duty to show respect for persons The duty to be sensitive to cultural difference The duty not to exploit the vulnerable or less
powerful
Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2002)
path
Duty to Alleviate Suffering
The duty to alleviate suffering enjoins us to do what we can to reduce the amount of suffering in the world.
The more suffering we help to eliminate, the better our action
Acknowledging the duty, however, does not mean that it overrides all other claims
In situations were resources are limited, the challenge is to strike an acceptable balance between competing demands
path
“Ought” implies “Can”
A person’s duty to benefit another is related to his or her capacity to do so, whether financial or practical.
– If a benefit cannot be provided for reasons of practical constraint, the duty to do so is weakened.
– Conversely, if a country’s wealth allows it to confer a benefit on the inhabitants of another country, the wealthier country has a stronger duty to provide that benefit.
path
“Can” implies “should”
“ If it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought morally to do it.”
Peter Singer, Philosophy and Public Affairs
1972:1:229-43
path
Informed Consent is a process
Informed consent is a process of collaborative communication and decision making, not the signing of a form
Informed consent requires that prospective participants:– Be appropriately informed about the
nature of the research– Adequately understand this information
and its implications– Voluntarily decide to participate, without
coercion– Explicitly consent to participate, orally or
in writing
path
Legal and moral agenda can sometimes conflict
Indemnify the research institution
Facilitate collaborative decision making
VS.
Length of formsDegree of technical information impartedWritten versus oral consentEmphasis on right to withdraw
path
Therapeutic Misconception
“Therapeutic misconception” refers to the tendency of some research participants to wrongly assume that whatever drug or intervention they are offered must work or be beneficial (or why would it be offered?)
It occurs when the goals of research and those of therapy or “health care” become confused in the participants mind.
The therapeutic misconception is a major threat to “informed consent.”
path
Putting it all together: What makes research
ethical?
Putting it all together: What makes research
ethical?
path
What Makes Research Ethical?
Social or scientific value Scientific validity Fair subject selection Favorable risk-benefit ratio Independent review Informed consent Respect for potential and enrolled subjects Collaborative partnership
Emanual et al., JAMA, 283, 2000
path
Seven Steps for Ethical Research
1. Priorities: Did the study address a priority issue? Whose?
2. Planning: Was the study well designed to optimize the chances of generating useful knowledge and protecting subjects?
3. Permission: Was the project reviewed and cleared by the relevant institutions? Did the investigators obtain informed consent?
4. Performance: Was the study conducted in a way that respected the rights of the subjects and minimized the risks to them?
5. Processing: Were the results correctly analyzed and interpreted?
6. Publication: Were the results published and disseminated?7. Programming: Have the findings been translated to policy and
action?