The Common Rule (45 CFR 46, Subpart A) governs research that is conducted on human beings if it is funded by one of 18 federal agencies. It requires a review of proposed research by an Institutional Review Board (IRB), the informed consent of research subjects, and institutional assurances of compliance with the regulations. In 1974, 45 CFR 46 was published following some cases of harm to human subjects, such as those caused by thalidomide drug trials and the United States Public Health Service syphilis study in Tuskeegee, Alabama. The regulations had their roots in numerous international agreements, such as the Nuremberg Code and the Declaration of Helsinki, and domestic policies, such as those put forth by the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (DHEW; now the Department of Health and Human Services, HHS). In 1991, 16 federal agencies adopted 45 CFR 46, Subpart A, which then became known as the Common Rule. Since the Common Rule took effect, events like the death of Jesse Gelsinger in 1999 due to his participation a clinical trial have prompted scrutiny of the Rule and its ability to protect research subjects. In order to help enhance research subject protections, in 2000 HHS removed the Office for Protection from Research Risks (OPRR) from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and created a new office -- the Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP) -- in an elevated position in HHS. In addition, groups like the National Bioethics Advisory Commission and the National Academies raised the following policy questions: (1) Should the Common Rule be applied to non-federally funded research, social and behavioural research, international clinical trials, and research with human biological materials? (2) Do existing provisions ensure the participation and protection of children, prisoners, minorities, those with diminished capacity, pregnant women, foetuses, neonates, and people in emergency situations? (3) What should be the requirements regarding IRBs' membership, responsibilities, training, and registration? (4) How should conflicts of interest, accreditation, ongoing research, and adverse event reporting be handled? (5) How should basic and research-related medical care's cost, and IRB liability for harm be handled? (6) How should the human subjects protection system be reassessed, adequate resources ensured, and the burdens and benefits of amending regulations appropriately weighed? (7) How does 45 CFR 46 interact with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations for the protection of human subjects (21 CFR 50 and 56), and the Privacy Rule of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) (45 CFR 146)?
... Rhoda E. Howard , from “ Human Rights and the Necessity for Cultural Change , " Focus on Law Studies 336 NO : Vinay Lal , from " The Imperialism of Human Rights , ” Focus on Law Studies 340 Rhoda E. Howard , a Canadian sociologist ...
The proposal to establish what Chief Justice Richard J. Hughes called a hospital “ Ethics Committee ” gave a major impetus to a new Robert M. Veatch . “ Hospital Ethics Committees : Is There A Role ? ” Abridged from The Hasting Center ...
IBM, 306, 332 Bravery, 426 Braybrooke, David, 380 Breast implants, 204-06, 211, 221-22 Brennan, Troyen, 334, 381 Brett, Allan S., 218 Brewin, Thurstan B., 328 Briguglio, John, 108 Brock, Dan, 24, 53, 76, 106-7, 161-62, 164, 224, ...
... that the decision of Dr Todd can be rationally and responsibly supported ... whatever may have been his alternatives. ... in Walker-Smith v GMC146 the court recognised that the line between innovative treatment and experimental ...
Emanual (oncology and medical ethics, Harvard) rejects the argument that recent issues of medical ethics are the result of new technologies, and contends that they are an inevitable consequence of liberal political values.
menopause, creating the opportunity for safe, effective relief and treatment for women (Pearson, 2002; Mishra et al., 2010). There are myriad products on the market that claim to relieve the distressing symptoms of menopause.
New Scholasticism 54 (1980): 200–12; Gilbert Meilaender, “The Distinction between Killing and Allowing to Die,” Theological Studies 37 (1976): 467–70; Raanan Gillon, “Euthanasia, Withholding Life-Prolonging Treatment, ...
The Patient Self - Determination Act David B. Clarke 1. The federal Patient Self - Determination Act ( PSDA ) became effective on December 1 , 1991more than 15 years after California became the first state to pass its Natural Death Act ...
In terms of medicine and clinical ethics ( that deal with questions of what should be done regarding a specific patient , an individual ) , the object ... What is ( are ) the contextual scale ( s ) and what the constituent scale ( s ) ?
Translated by Joseph Ward Swain . London : George Allen & Unwin , 1950. New York : Free Press , 1965. Classic monograph purporting to show origins of religious systems reflected in those of Australian Aborigines .