This paper is on a Harvard case study of Pat Parker, a lawyer who conducts political oppositional research and prepares reports. The work is done by contract between Parker and the candidate's campaign. The scenario is that Parker previously provided a report to a campaign, two years later; a group of lawyers who supported the candidate's opponent wants to buy the report plus other materials. The three parts of the paper include: the legal analysis, the ethical analysis and the recommendation for action. The paper considers contract law, copyright law, campaign statutes and codes of ethics. Bibliography lists 6 sources. Pat Parker conducts research grant applications (R01) to investigate ethical issues in human subjects research. The Code of Federal Regulations - Protection of Human Subjects (45 CFR, Part 46) provides a regulatory framework that all Parker-supported researchers must follow. Recent developments in biomedical and behavioral research, however, including the rapid growth of new interventions and technologies, increasing involvement of foreign populations in clinical research, and concerns about financial conflicts of interest among researchers, challenge investigators' abilities to interpret and apply the regulations (Buergenthal, 1995). Other situations (e.g., research with vulnerable populations, the use of data banks or archives, research on stigmatizing diseases or conditions) may present difficulties for identifying strategies, procedures, and/or techniques that will enhance/ensure the ethical involvement of human participants in research. The purpose of this program announcement is to solicit research addressing the ethical challenges of involving human participants in research in order to inform and optimize...
... middle of paper ...
...cal commitments and research purposes – ideally, with the thoughtful, informed discussion and guidance of the appropriate IRB. Parker recommendations and discussion should be seen precisely as the effort to propose methods and demonstrate their applications to a few specific instances - resulting in the recognition that more than one ethically-defensible response is possible. Hence Parker disagreements on specific issues are emphasized. But in this fashion, we hope that Parker work will help researchers, IRBs, and users develop ethical responses to their specific dilemmas in Political Research, especially as the distinctive characteristics of Political Research and its highly interdisciplinary character make it difficult to apply extant guidelines to these new contexts (Buergenthal, 1995). References Cunningham, Thomas J. Legal Aspects of Campus Unrest, June 1965.
Ethical violations committed on underprivileged populations first surfaced close to 50 years ago with the discovery of the Tuskegee project. The location, a small rural town in Arkansas, and the population, consisting of black males with syphilis, would become a startling example of research gone wrong. The participants of the study were denied the available treatment in order further the goal of the research, a clear violation of the Belmont Report principle of beneficence. This same problem faces researchers today who looking for an intervention in the vertical transmission of HIV in Africa, as there is an effective protocol in industrialized nations, yet they chose to use a placebo-contro...
“Freedom of expression, willful promotion of hatred and the charter of civil rights and freedoms: R.v. Keegstra.” Ontario justice education network. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Mar. 2014. .
The experiment lasted more than forty years and did not garner media attention until 1972, when it was finally made public by Jean Heller of the Associated Press to an outraged nation. The fact that a medical practitioner would knowingly violate an individual’s rights makes one question their bioethical practices. What gives doctors the right to make a human being a lab rat? When both of these case studies began in the earlier half of the 20th century, African Americans were still fighting for the most
...n 1968, Reagan condemned student militants, saying: "There has been general incitement against properly constituted law enforcement authorities and general trampling of the will, the rights and freedom of movement of the majority by the organized, militant, and highly vocal minority" ("Takin it to the Streets," 346). It seems rather obvious today that "the great and thoughtful majority of citizens" to which Reagan referred in the same address are not always correct in their beliefs and that the laws that have been created by this majority, as well as the enforcement of such laws are not always just.
Fraser (1986). During a student assembly, Senior, Matthew Fraser gave a campaign speech to elect his friend to student government. Fraser’s speech was rife with sexual innuendo. Consequently he was suspended and his name removed from the list of possible graduation speakers—he was second in his class at the time. In this case, the Court established that there is a monumental difference between the First Amendment protection of expression for “dealing with a major issue of public policy and the lewdness of Fraser’s speech” (“Key Supreme Court Cases,” 2015). Comparatively, Foster’s high school points out that there is a monumental difference between Foster’s desire to express his individuality and impress girls, and the school’s desire to regulate the serious public concern of gang activity within the school. Indeed, in the petitioner’s application of Tinkering and Chalifoux court cases, the defense notes, in both First Amendment cases the students were addressing a major public issue—political and religion statements. Foster’s message of individuality, however, decidedly lacked a message that would safeguard his First Amendment
Since the inception of this mode of research, peoples’ perception of what constitutes moral behavior towards patients and specifically harvesting cells from patients has changed. Over time, other doctors would take cells from patients without patient consent and use them for research. Coming from this, people began to think about how ethical this was, and especially if the potential for scientific or medical advances outweighs the injustices imposed by the lack of obtaining patient consent. One could argue that in the area of ethical behavior and medical advances, it might be necessary and acceptable to take cells or tissue samples without patient consent. And even though these cells and the research of these cells might not affect the patient, what advantages and disadvantages could come from obtaining or not obtaining patient consent?
ProQuest Staff. "Civil Rights Timeline." Leading Issues Timelines. 2014: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 22 Apr. 2014. .
The world of anthropology is tightly woven into research of humans and their cultures. One of the most important principles of the Code of Ethics of the American Anthropological Association (AAA) is found in Part III, Section A, Number 1: “Anthropological researchers have primary ethical obligations to the people, species, and materials they study and to the people with whom they work.” (American Anthropological Association, 2009) This main principle helps to guide social scientists through a maze of ethical dilemmas such as if and how the research itself may harm or otherwise impact those with whom they are studying. While the purpose of the research may be to gain knowledge of the plight of a certain individual or group of individuals, by the extension of the sharing of this knowledge the person or persons being studied may draw unwanted attention. By utilizing the Code of Ethics, the framework has been established so that the researcher is guided “to consult actively with...
In “Voices from the Margins: The regulation of Student Activism in the New Corporate University”, Elizabeth Brule analyzes how student codes of conduct are used to regulate student political advocacy on campuses in North America. Over the years, there has been an ongoing battle between student activists and institutional policies which regulate social justice advocacy work. Students continuously broadcast political views in an attempt to exercise constitutional rights of free speech. Some in which, have been sanctioned by respective educational facilities. More specifically, York University, Canada’s third largest public university, had its first Student Code of Conduct in 1970. The implementation of the code has emerged to be based on principles
Informed consent has been preserved as a sacred value since medicine started caring for the sick and it is still upheld today as a critical component of clinical research. Ensuring voluntary participation through an informed decision-making process in clinical research continues to be an ethical and moral obligation of the study team, quite often the study nurses. Over time these forms have reached a degree of unreasonableness; exceeding twenty pages, being too complex, and readability that exceeds the targeted populations. A deluge of literature over the past decade reaffirms and begs for change. In 2011, the federal government agency, Office of Human Research Protections, has responded by publishing and receiving comments on an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rule-Making (ANPRM); however, there has been no further public information of action. This brief aims to provide an overview of the issues, background, as well as several possible ways to lobby for action.
Research is viewed as a scientific human endeavour that is organised according to a range of protocols, methods, guidelines and legislation (Gerrish & Lacey, 2010). Research ethics is that domain of enquiry that identifies ethical challenges with a view to developing guidelines that safeguard against any harm and protects the rights of human subjects in research (Rogers, 2008).
Marshall, Burke . "The Protest Movement and the Law." Virginia Law Review 51.5 (1965): 785-
Steinbock, Bonnie, Alex J. London, and John D. Arras. "’Rights- Based’ Approaches." Ethical Issues in Modern Medicine. Contemporary Readings in Bioethics. 8th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2013. 23. Print.
Works Cited The "Civil Rights" Cornell University Law School, Inc. 2010. Web. The Web. The Web. 1 Apr. 2011.
Title I describes the “award” aspect of the bill to help fund health-related research. The purpose is to expand rewards for ethical, health research with very specific stipulations, criteria and accountability procedures. It places most of this responsibility in the hands of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. While this is significant in its own sense, Title II presents even more profound and impactful implications. It is relevantly entitled “Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research”. It creates the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, the National Advisory Council for the Protection of Subjects and Biomedical and Behavioral Research and Institutional Review Boards (Congressional Research Service (CRS), 2014). These three developments alone are only part of this lengthy legislation; however, they are probably the greatest achievements of it – as they all effectively remain