Abstract
AbstractThe Belmont Report continues to be held in high regard, and most bioethical analyses conducted in recent years have presumed that it affects United States federal regulations. However, the assessments of the report’s creators are sharply divided. Understanding the historic reputation of this monumental report is thus crucial. We first recount the historical context surrounding the creation of this report. Subsequently, we review the process involved in developing ethical guidelines and describe the report’s features. Additionally, we analyze the effect of unfolding events on the subsequent creation of federal regulations, especially on gene therapy clinical trials. Moreover, throughout this paper we evaluate the ethical principles outlined in this report and describe how they overlap with the issue of protecting socially vulnerable groups. Based on the analysis, we conclude that the features of the Belmont Report cannot be considered as having affected the basic sections of the federal regulations for ethical reviews that were made uniform in 1981. Nevertheless, regarding the regulations on gene therapy clinical trials—which were at first expected to be applicable to research involving children—in addition to implementing policies regarding the public review of protocols that passed ethical review, this report’s principles are clearly reflected in the key notes that should have been referred to when the report was created.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference65 articles.
1. Annas, G.J. 1991. Mengele’s Birthmark: the Nuremberg Code in United States Courts. The Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy 7: 17–45.
2. Areen, J. 1985. Regulating human gene therapy. West Virginia Law Review 88 (2): 153–171.
3. Beauchamp, T.L. 1995. Principlism and its alleged competitors. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 5 (3): 181–198.
4. Beauchamp, T.L. 2006. Assessing the Belmont Report. APA Newsletter on Philosophy and Medicine 5 (2): 2–3.
5. Beauchamp, T.L. 2007. History and theory in “applied ethics”. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 17 (1): 55–64.
Cited by
16 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献