Addiction, Voluntary Choice, and Informed Consent: A Reply to Uusitalo and Broers

In an earlier article in this journal I argued that the question of whether heroin addicts can give voluntary consent to take part in research which involves giving them a choice of free heroin does not - in contrast with a common assumption in the bioethics literature - depend exclusively on whethe...

Полное описание

Сохранить в:  
Библиографические подробности
Главный автор: Henden, Edmund (Автор)
Другие авторы: Uusitalo, Susanne (библиографическое прошлое)
Формат: Электронный ресурс Статья
Язык:Английский
Проверить наличие: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Загрузка...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Опубликовано: Wiley-Blackwell [2016]
В: Bioethics
Год: 2016, Том: 30, Выпуск: 4, Страницы: 293-298
Индексация IxTheo:NCJ Научная этика
Другие ключевые слова:B Informed Consent
B Addiction
B heroin-assisted treatment
B voluntary choice
B Autonomy
Online-ссылка: Presumably Free Access
Volltext (Verlag)
Volltext (doi)
Описание
Итог:In an earlier article in this journal I argued that the question of whether heroin addicts can give voluntary consent to take part in research which involves giving them a choice of free heroin does not - in contrast with a common assumption in the bioethics literature - depend exclusively on whether or not they possess the capacity to resist their desire for heroin. In some cases, circumstances and beliefs might undermine the voluntariness of the choices a person makes even if they do possess a capacity for self-control. Based on what I took to be a plausible definition of voluntariness, I argued that the circumstances and beliefs typical of many vulnerable heroin addicts are such that we have good reasons to suspect they cannot give voluntary consent to take part in such research, even assuming their desire for heroin is not irresistible. In a recent article in this journal, Uusitalo and Broers object to this on the grounds that I misdescribe heroin addicts' options set, that the definition of voluntariness on which I rely is unrealistic and too demanding, and, more generally, that my view of heroin addiction is flawed. I think their arguments derive from a misunderstanding of the view I expressed in my article. In what follows I hope therefore to clarify my position.
ISSN:1467-8519
Reference:Kritik von "Rethinking Informed Consent in Research on Heroin-Assisted Treatment (2015)"
Второстепенные работы:Enthalten in: Bioethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1111/bioe.12208