Law and public policy in human studies research

Perspectives in Biology and Medicine

Volumn 43, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 362-372

  Mishkin, Barbara ^a  

^a Hogan and Hartson   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADVISORY COMMITTEE; ARTICLE; BIOETHICS; BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; GOVERNMENT; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HISTORY; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEGAL APPROACH; LEGAL ASPECT; METHODOLOGY; POLICY; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD; RESEARCH; STANDARD; UNITED STATES;

BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; LEGAL APPROACH;

ADVISORY COMMITTEES; BIOETHICS; ETHICS COMMITTEES; FEDERAL GOVERNMENT; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HISTORY, 20TH CENTURY; HUMAN EXPERIMENTATION; HUMANS; NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH (U.S.); PUBLIC POLICY; RESEARCH; RESEARCH DESIGN; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0034151402     PISSN: 00315982     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/pbm.2000.0022     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. United States v. Karl Brandt, 2 Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuremberg Military Tribunal (The Medical Case) (1947) at 81.
2. Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital, 211 N.Y. 125, 129-30; 105 N.E. 92, 93 (1914).
3. Cruzan v. Harmon, 760 S.W. 2d 408 (Mo. 1989), affirmed, sub. nom. Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dept. of Health, 497 U.S. 261 (1990) (and cases cited therein).
4. Salgo v. Leland Stanford Jr. University, 317 P.2d 170 (Cal. 1957).
5. Halushka v. University of Saskatchewan, 53 Dominion Law Rpts. (2d) 436 (1965); described in W. T. Reich, ed. Encyclopedia of Bioethics. New York: Macmillan, 1995. 1636.
6. Testimony and related documents pertaining to the research and license revocation proceedings are reprinted in J. Katz. Experimentation With Human Beings. New York: Russell Sage, 1972. 44-65.
7. Canterbury v. Spence, 464 F.2d 772 (D.C. Cir. 1972), cert denied 409 U.S. 1064.
8. NIH. Group consideration of clinical research procedures deviating from accepted medical practice or involving unusual hazard (1953), reprinted in Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, Final Report (1995), suppl. vol. 1, p. 321.
9. U.S. Surgeon General. Memorandum to heads of institutions conducting research with public health service grants (8 Feb. 1966), reprinted in Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, Final Report (1995), suppl. vol. 1, p. 473.
10. Public Health Service. Institutional Guide to DHEW Policy on Protection of Human Subjects (1971).
11. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Regulations for the Protection of Human Subjects, 45 C.F.R. Part 46 (1974).
12. Quality of health care: Human experimentation. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Health of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, 93rd Cong., 1st Sess. (1973).
13. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).
14. National Research Act, Pub. L. 93-348 (1974), codified at 42 U.S.C. 218.
15. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects. Belmont Report, 44 Fed. Reg. 23192 (1979).
16. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects. Institutional Review Boards, 43 Fed. Reg. 56174 (1978).
17. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects. Research involving prisoners, 42 Fed. Reg. 3076 (1977).
18. Federal Advisory Committee Act, Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770, codified at 5 U.S.C. Appx. I (1972).
19. Stolberg, S. A small spark ignites debate on laws on cloning human beings. New York Times (20 Jan.1998): A1;
20. National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Cloning Human Beings (June 1997);
21. Wilmut, I., et al. Nature 385:810, 1997.
22. HEW Ethics Advisory Board. HEW support of research involving human in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer, 44 Fed. Reg. 35033 (1979).
23. Ethics Committee, American Fertility Society. Ethical considerations of the new reproductive technologies. Fertility Sterility 46(3, suppl.):895, 1986.
24. HEW Ethics Advisory Board. HEW support of fetoscopy for prenatal diagnosis," 44 Fed. Reg. 47732 (1979).
25. The 10 reports of the President's Commission on these subjects are summarized in 48 Fed. Reg. 34408 (1983).
26. Swazey, J., and S. Scher, eds. Whistleblowing in Biomedical Research. Washington, DC: President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Research, 1981.
27. Office of Science and Technology Policy, The White House. Common rule on protecting human subjects, 56 Fed. Reg. 28002 (1991).
28. Wadman, M. Ethics worries over execution twist to Internet's "Visible Man." Nature 657:382, 1996.
29. Palca, J. How could embryo cloners overlook human subject rules? J. NIH Res. 7:24-28, 1995;
30. Macklin, R. Cloning without prior approval: A response to recent disclosures of non-compliance. Kennedy Inst. Ethics J. 5(1):57-60, 1995;
31. Holden, C. Embryo cloners jumped the gun. Science 266:1949, 1994.
32. Clinical Trials Advisor. Special Report: Death of a Healthy College Student Volunteer. Naples, FL: 31 Oct. 1996.
33. Mishkin, B. It's IRBs all over again. AAAS Prof. Ethics Report (Spring):4-6, 1994.