Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
The Limits of ConsentA socio-ethical approach to human subject research in medicine$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Oonagh Corrigan, John McMillan, Kathleen Liddell, Martin Richards, and Charles Weijer

Print publication date: 2009

Print ISBN-13: 9780199231461

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2009

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199231461.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (oxford.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2021. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 21 January 2021

Towards supported decision-making in biomedical research with cognitively vulnerable adults

Towards supported decision-making in biomedical research with cognitively vulnerable adults

Chapter:
(p.151) Chapter 9 Towards supported decision-making in biomedical research with cognitively vulnerable adults
Source:
The Limits of Consent
Author(s):

Philip Bielby

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199231461.003.0009

A particular challenge for consent in biomedical research is the participation of adults with mental disorder or intellectual disability to a degree that impinges on but does not necessarily erode decisional competence. This challenge is emphasized by recent developments in neuroscience which have reinvigorated interest in biomedical research with cognitively vulnerable human participants, particularly research into the origins and treatment of mental disorder. This chapter argues that we can best understand the scope and limits of consent as a ‘procedural’ principle of empowerment. It grounds this argument in a rationalist moral theory of human (or agency) rights devised by Alan Gewirth (1978). Drawing on the recent work of Gewirthian legal theorists Beyleveld and Brownsword (2004 and 2007), it offers a defence of the ethical significance of consent as a procedural human rights value, which does not in itself constitute a substantive human right.

Keywords:   informed consent, empowerment, biomedical research, human rights, mental disorder, intellectual disability, decisional competence

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .