Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “National Commission on Biomedical Ethics”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2004

Respect: or, how respect for persons became respect for autonomy.

This article provides an intellectual archeology of how the term "respect" has functioned in the field of bioethics. I argue that over time the function of the term has shifted, with a significant turning point occurring in 1979. Prior to 1979, the term "respect" connoted primarily the notion of "respect for persons" which functioned as an umbrella which conferred protection to autonomous persons and those with compromised autonomy. But in 1979, with the First Edition of Principles of Biomedical Ethics by Beauchamp and Childress, and the report of the Ethical Advisory Board (EAB) of the (then) Department of Health, Education, and Welfare entitled Research on In Vitro Fertilization, usage shifts from "respect for persons" to "respect for autonomy." Two results: 1) those with compromised autonomy are no longer protected by the canons of "respect" but rather the less overriding canons of beneficence; and 2) the term "respect" functions increasingly as a rhetorical device in public bioethics discourse.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMed1981

Final regulations amending basic HHS policy for the protection of human research subjects--Department of Health and Human Services. Final rule.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS or Department) is amending the HHS policy for the protection of human research subjects and responding to the recommendations of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (National Commission) and the President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research (President's Commission) concerning institutional review boards (IRBs).

Human Experimentation↗
PubMed1999

Psychiatric research ethics: an overview of evolving guidelines and current ethical dilemmas in the study of mental illness.

The field of psychiatry has an opportunity to construct a more refined, perhaps more enduring understanding of the ethical basis of mental illness research. The aim of this paper is to help advance this understanding by 1) tracing the evolution of the emerging ethic for biomedical experimentation, including recent recommendations of the President's National Bioethics Advisory Commission, and 2) reviewing data and concepts related to compelling ethical questions now faced in the study of mental disorders. Empirical findings on informed consent, the ethical safeguards of institutional review and surrogate decision making, and the relationship between scientific and ethical imperatives are outlined. Psychiatric researchers will increasingly be called upon to justify their scientific approaches and to seek ways of safeguarding the well-being of people with mental illness who participate in experiments. Most importantly, psychiatric investigators will need to demonstrate their appreciation and respect for ethical dimensions of investigation with special populations. Further empirical study and greater sophistication with respect to the distinct ethical issues in psychiatric research are needed. Although such measures present many challenges, they should not interfere with progress in neuropsychiatric science so long as researchers in our field seek to guide the process of reflection and implementation.

Bioethics↗
PubMed2003

The ethics of type 1 diabetes prediction and prevention research.

There are approximately one million cases of type 1 diabetes in the US, and the incidence is increasing worldwide. Given that two-thirds of cases present in childhood, it is critical that prediction and prevention research involve children. In this article, I examine whether current research methodologies conform to the ethical guidelines enumerated by the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, and adopted into the federal regulations that protect research subjects. I then offer two policy recommendations to help researchers design studies that conform to these ethical requirements.

Child↗
PubMed1978

Does biomedical research need an ethical watchdog?

The establishment of an ethical watchdog group to monitor biomedical research was a major recommendation in the preliminary report of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Although the American public generally views scientific advances in a positive light, society still needs to be informed of and involved in decisions about future technology.

Biomedical Research↗
PubMedDate not supplied

The fifth commission.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Advisory Committees↗
PubMed1993

Ethical considerations in planning and conducting research on human subjects.

The ethical conduct of research on humans requires more than a caring researcher and a legalistic adherence to federal regulations. It requires good planning and managing of issues accruing from the research relationship--communication, risk and perception of risk, and benefits--to all who have a stake in the relationship and outcome. In 1978 the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects in Biomedical and Behavioral Research identified ethical principles that should govern research on humans. Institutional review boards (IRBs) now exist in every organization that receives federal funding for human-subjects research. Researchers have an obligation to study the requirements of their IRB when they plan their research. Further, they must establish appropriate procedures for obtaining informed consent and assessing risk, risk perception, and ways to increase the benefits of research.

Advisory Committees↗
PubMed2004

The "nation's conscience:" assessing bioethics commissions as public forums.

As the fifth national bioethics commission has concluded its work and a sixth is currently underway, it is time to step back and consider appropriate measures of success. This paper argues that standard measures of commissions' influence fail to fully assess their role as public forums. From the perspective of democratic theory, a critical dimension of this role is public engagement: the ability of a commission to address the concerns of the general public, to learn how average citizens resolve moral issues in healthcare, and to monitor public opinion on the topics addressed in the commission. Such a public forum role is supported by the critical literature within bioethics, which has deemed some commissions successful, supported more generally by the history of bioethics as a reform discourse that has brought socially important values into the medical domain, and supported more generally still by the example of the great social issues commissions of the 1960s.

Advisory Committees↗
PubMed1997

Research with cognitively impaired subjects. Unfinished business in the regulation of human research.

In 1978, the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research issued an important report that addressed the difficult ethical issues arising in research involving subjects with mental disabilities. However, because of irreconcilable conflicts between the scientific community and rights-oriented advocacy groups, the federal government never issued the special regulations pertaining to these issues that had been envisioned by the National Commission. Because these important ethical issues have not yet been adequately addressed by policy-making bodies, protection of cognitively impaired subjects depends too heavily on the diverse ethical sensitivities of individual investigators and on ad hoc responses of particular institutional review boards. Researchers should support a credible and authoritative process for reexamining and resolving ethical issues relating to research with cognitively impaired subjects. This can be accomplished without leading to the stalemate that doomed the National Commission's proposals. The challenge is to forge a consensus on ethical guidelines and safeguards that will most reasonably accommodate the goals of protecting the dignity and well-being of research subjects while avoiding undue impediments to valuable scientific inquiry.

Advisory Committees↗