Why participating in scientific research is a moral duty

Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (5):325-328 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Our starting point in this article is the debate between John Harris and Iain Brassington on whether or not there is a duty to take part in scientific research. We consider the arguments that have been put forward based on fairness and a duty to rescue, and suggest an alternative justification grounded in a hypothetical agreement: that is, because effective healthcare cannot be taken for granted, but requires continuous medical research, and nobody knows what kind of healthcare they will need, participating in research should be viewed from the perspective of a social contract, based on our mutual need for medical advances

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

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
2013-11-22

Downloads
131 (#341,963)

6 months
36 (#243,062)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Mats J. Hansson
Uppsala Universitet

References found in this work

Morals by agreement.David Gauthier - 1986 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Scientific research is a moral duty.J. Harris - 2005 - Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (4):242-248.
The Obligation to Participate in Biomedical Research.G. Owen Schaefer, Ezekiel J. Emanuel & Alan Wertheimer - 2009 - Journal of the American Medical Association 302 (1):67-72.
Rethinking research ethics.Rosamond Rhodes - 2005 - American Journal of Bioethics 5 (1):7 – 28.

View all 12 references / Add more references