The Swinging Pendulum in Research Benefits of Research vs Protection of Participants

¶ … Swinging the Pendulum: Shifting Views of Justice in Human Subjects Research" By Ana Mastroianni And Jeffrey Kahn (542-547) Compare the conception of justice in the Belmont era to the conception of justice in the 1990s? What is the significance of these shifting views of justice? The conception of justice in the Belmont era pertains to realizing that vulnerable groups, such as prisoners, elderly populations or children, can be exploited by researchers, who do not gain informed consent -- and thus justice was viewed as something that could protect these groups or prevent their exploitation from occurring.

An example of exploitation that occurred would be the Tuskegee experiments, where a minority group (blacks) were not told they had syphilis by researchers nor were they told they were part of a study. They were deliberately not treated even when treatment was available because they were the control of the experiment (to see what sort of effect syphilis would have on the body). This was exploitation that occurred for 40 years from 1932 to 1972.

Thus, the Belmont era perceives this and views justice in terms relating to this kind of exploitation by researchers, who may be attempting to come to a great good (understanding) but employ underhanded and unethical methods of arriving at that understanding. The conception of justice in the 1990s is based more on understanding what benefits can arise as a result of research, and this means that the risk involved in research is sometimes overlooked in favor of the benefits that might be accrued.

In other words, researchers are reverting back to the mindset that allowed the Tuskegee experiment to be conducted: it consists of an indifference to ethical standards because of a focus on the utilitarian object/principle underlying the experiment/research.

The significance of this shift in views of justice shows that research has come full circle from the 1930s and that a better balance needs to be struck in terms of showing respect and care for human life in all capacities (and adherence to ethical behavior such as informed consent) and the need for understanding. Leaning too far one way or the other is dangerous. 2.

How does the shift in the conception of justice ensure that research subjects are adequately protected? The emphasis on obtaining informed consent is particularly important in this regard. Ethical standards are now very standardized and researchers are made aware of their ethical responsibilities in terms of what they owe their patients or whoever it is they are treatment as well as participants in any studies that they perform. The era of litigation has made this especially clear lest any researchers fail to understand.

However, as so much emphasis is put on protecting participants to avoid blowback (such as lawsuits, which can be very costly), there may be fewer opportunities to conduct essential research that could expand our knowledge of particular fields. Still, this conception of justice is important because it ensures that subjects are adequately protected by valuing their rights and putting those at the forefront of any study that is conducted involving persons, either directly or indirectly. Thus, the person and not the outcome is what is give the most attention.

"The Dangers of Difference" by Patricia King (CIB, 548-551) 1. What does Patricia King mean by the "dilemma of difference?" The dilemma of difference refers to the matter of race and how racially sensitive society has become. Race has been politicized to the point where it is considered politically incorrect to talk about differences between races, even though there is scientific evidence that points to racially-correlated factors that act as variables in research, which contributes to our better understanding of human nature, etc.

Thus, there are differences but for fear of minority groups like blacks being exploited, as they have been in the past, the differences are downplayed or ignored, and race is not used so often as a factor/variable in research. This creates a dilemma in research studies, because of the lack of research/understanding given to racially-correlated factors as a result. But because of the politicization of race, there does not appear to be an easy solution to this problem -- thus, the dilemma of difference exists. 2.

How did the Tuskegee Syphilis Study contribute to the tendency of too much protection that might have promoted the exclusion or underrepresentation of vulnerable groups, including African-Americans? Underrepresentation in clinical.