Why talk about Legal and Ethical Issues? 4
All research has the potential to impose some measure of harm
Necessary to ensure the protection of research participants
Informed consent and patients’/clients’ rights
End research if pt is harmed potentially
What happened in each case
Tuskegee Syphilis Study in Alabama (1932-1973)
Sterilization experiments in Auschwitz (1940-1944)
Dr. E. Cameron’s psychiatric experiments in Montreal (1950s-1960s)
Willobrook Hospital Study (1972)
AIDS/AZT case in Ivory Coast, Africa (1994)
Tuskegee – people with syphilis were not being told there was a drug to treat them
Sterilization experiments - during this time there was forced sterilization for people that were not to be considered to be apart of the arian race (people that were blind, etc.), this further moved into
Auschwitz to test levels of radiation that would kill the ovum but not kill the participant and the people were not aware that they were apart of this study
Dr E Cameron – ECT unable to walk, feed themselves
Willobrook – children with mental incompetence weer taken to the hospital and were told they wouldn’t be put into the treatment facility until they agreed to put they child into a study with hepatisis so their children were infected with hepatitis
AIDs – people with HIV were given placebo even tho their was a treatment because they wanted to see what would happen if they were not treated
Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10”, Vol. 2, pp. 181-182. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949 outlined 10 rules known as Nuremberg code
Also present in the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (TCPS2) states three ethical principles
Respect for Persons AKA Freedom to participate or not participate in research
Beneficence AKA Obligation to do no harm
Justice AKA Fair treatment of human subjects
5 basic human rights
There must be informed consent3
process consent
and assent 3
Informed consent
Process consent
-Voluntary continued participation
Assent
Review slide on elements of informed consent
10 of them
Research with Indigenous Peoples
Research involving Aboriginal peoples in Canada has been defined and carried out primarily by non-Aboriginal researchers. The approaches used have not generally reflected Aboriginal world views, and the research has not necessarily benefited Aboriginal peoples or communities. As a result, Aboriginal peoples continue to regard research, particularly research originating outside their communities, with a certain apprehension or mistrust”
pg 132-133
Research involving animals or human genome related materials
Who governs it
Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC, 2016) is an independent body funded by CIHR, with detailed guidelines for animal-based research
Tri-council CIHR (2014) guidelines for research involving human gametes, embryos, or fetuses
See text page 132-133
Scientific Misconduct
(AKA Fraud, Fabrication, Falsification)
-What is it
-When does is happen 3
Relates to what we do with new evidence
Regulated by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
DNA- Rosalind Franklin discovered it and James Watson, Francis Crick stole it I think
Andrew – claimed to link the vaccine to colitis and autism spectrum disorders. The paper was retracted in 2010 is still cited by anti-vaccinationists.
Dr. Chandra - Study the effects of formula for infants, can infant formula help protect babies against allergies. Dr. Chandra hired a nurse: Marline Harvey was supposed to find participants for this study (looking for infants that have chosen this formula) and she had concerns, she found that 2 formulas could protect from allergies and 1 would not protect from allergies despite the fact that all three brands had the same ingredients. She didn’t think that results were matching up and later found out that Dr. Chandra was creating infant participants that didn’t exist (wanted a larger sample size but didn’t have one) paper was published in 1989 and was retracted in 2016