Ethical and legal standards for research in prisons

Behavioral Sciences and the Law

Volumn 21, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 671-686

  Kalmbach, K C ^a   Lyons Jr , Phillip M ^a  

^a SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ETHICS; HUMAN RIGHTS; INFORMED CONSENT; JUSTICE; LAW; LEGAL ASPECT; PRISON; RECUMBENCY; RESEARCH; REVIEW; STANDARD;

BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH;

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; CODES OF ETHICS; DECEPTION; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HISTORY, 20TH CENTURY; HUMAN EXPERIMENTATION; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; PRISONERS; PRISONS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0141926415     PISSN: 07353936     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bsl.533     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments. (1996). Final report of the advisory committee on human radiation experiments. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
2. American Psychological Association. (1992). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 47, 1597-1611.
3. American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060-1073.
4. Annas, G. J., Glantz, L. H., & Katz, B. F. (1977). Informed consent to human experimentation: The subject's dilemma. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
5. Babbo, T. J. (2000). Begging the question: Fetal tissue research, protection of human subjects, and the banality of evil. DePaul Journal of Health Care Law, 3, 383-409.
6. Bailey v. Lally, 481 F. Supp. 203 (D. Md. 1979).
7. Brakel, S. J. (1996). Considering behavioral and biomedical research on detainees in the mental health unit of an urban mega-jail. New England Journal on Criminal and Civil Confinement, 22, 1-27.
8. Caplan, A. L. (Ed.). (1992). When medicine went mad: Bioethics and the Holocaust. Totowa, NJ: Humana.
9. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). The Tuskegee syphilis study: A hard lesson learned. Retrieved January 2, 2003, from http://www.cdc.gov/nchstp/od/tuskegee/time.htm
10. Clinton, W. J. (1997). Remarks by the President in apology for study done in Tuskegee. Retrieved January 2, 2003, from http://www.cdc.gov/nchstp/od/tuskegee/clintonp.htm
11. Ethical and Policy Issues in Research Involving Research Participants, 66 Fed. Reg. 45998 (2001).
12. Garnett, R. W. (1996). Why informed consent? Human experimentation and the ethics of autonomy. The Catholic Lawyer, 36, 455-511.
13. Gray, J. N., Lyons, P. M., Jr., & Melton, G. B. (1995). Ethical and legal issues in AIDS research. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
14. Hoffman, D. E., Schwartz, J., & DeRenzo, E. G. (2000). Regulating research with decisionally impaired individuals: Are we making progress? DePaul Journal of Health Care Law, 3, 547-608.
15. Hoffman, S. (2000). Beneficial and unusual punishment: An argument in support of prisoner participation in clinical trials. Indiana Law Review, 33, 475-515.
16. Kaimowitz v. Michigan Department of Mental Health. Civil No. 73-19434-AW (Cir. Ct. Wayne County, Mich., July 10, 1973), summarized in 42 U.S.L.W. 2063 (July 31, 1973), reported in 1 Mental Disability L. Rep. 147 (1976).
17. Kazdin, A. E. (2003). Research design in clinical psychology (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
18. Leopold, N. F., Jr. (1958). Life plus 99 years. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
19. Moreno, J. D. (1997). Reassessing the effect of the Nuremberg Code on American medical ethics. Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy, 13, 347-360.
20. Moreno, J. D. (1998). Regulation of research on the decisionally impaired: History and gaps in the current regulatory system. Journal of Health Care Law and Policy, 1, 1-21.
21. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (1979). The Belmont Report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research (DHEW publication (OS) 78-0012). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Retrieved March 5, 2002, from http://ohrp.osophs.dhhs.gov/humansubjects/guidance/belmont.htm
22. National Institutes of Health. (1995). Guidelines for the Conduct of Research Involving Human Subjects at the National Institutes of Health. Retrieved March 5, 2002, from http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines.php3
23. National Research Act of 1974, Pub. L. No. 93-348, 88 Stat. 342 (1974), codified in scattered sections of Title 42 U.S.C.
24. Nuremberg Code, Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, 181-182 (1949; Washington, DC: U.S. G.P.O. 1949-1953). Retrieved March 5, 2002, from http://www.ushmm.org/research/doctors/Nuremberg_Code.htm
25. Protection of Human Subjects, 45 C.F.R. 46 (revised 11/13/2001).
26. Reich, W. T. (Ed.). (1995). Encyclopedia of bioethics. New York: Macmillan.
27. Ryan, A. J. (1994/1995). Note: True protection for persons with severe mental disabilities, such as schizophrenia, involved as subjects in research? A look and consideration of the "Protection of Human Subjects." Journal of Law and Health, 9, 349-376.
28. Schroeder, K. (1983). Note: A recommendation to the FDA concerning drug research on prisoners. Southern California Law Review, 56, 969-1000.
29. Stanley, B. H., Sieber, J. E., & Melton, G. B. (Eds.). (1996). Research ethics: A psychological approach. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
30. United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, U.N. Doc. A/810 (1948).
31. Winick, B. J. (1997). Coercion and mental health treatment. Denver University Law Review, 74, 1145-1168.
32. World Medical Association. (1964). Declaration of Helsinki. Adopted by the 18th World Medical Assembly, Helsinki, Finland. Retrieved March 5, 2002, from http://www.wma.net/e/policy/63.html