Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Enrolling a research candidate in a trial remains legitim... — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Enrolling a research candidate in a trial remains legitimate even when the candidate fails to comprehend disclosed information despite repeated efforts.

    BioethicsMoral Responsibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Investigators fulfill their obligations by giving candidates the opportunity to issue autonomous authorization.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Investigators avoid potential fraud by providing disclosure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Investigators treat candidates fairly by offering the opportunity for informed consent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Valid consent requires actual understanding, not merely the opportunity for understanding, as Faden and Beauchamp argue in 'A History and Theory of Informed Consent' (1986).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Enrollment without comprehension treats the candidate as a means to research ends, violating Kantian respect for persons as rational autonomous agents.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Procedural compliance with disclosure cannot substitute for the substantive condition of competent understanding that grounds the moral legitimacy of consent itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Paul Appelbaum's competency standard requires that candidates demonstrably manipulate disclosed information to reach a reasoned decision, not merely receive it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When comprehension fails despite repeated efforts, investigators have epistemic evidence that the candidate lacks decision-making capacity, triggering surrogate consent obligations rather than enrollment authorization.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityBioethics

    Connections

    2 topics

    Rights & Liberty2 linkedJustice & Punishment2 linked

    Related

    Enrollment without comprehension treats the candidate as a means to research end...Investigators avoid potential fraud by providing disclosure.Investigators fulfill their obligations by giving candidates the opportunity to ...Investigators treat candidates fairly by offering the opportunity for informed c...
    +5 moreShow less
    Paul Appelbaum's competency standard requires that candidates demonstrably manip...Procedural compliance with disclosure cannot substitute for the substantive cond...Providing the opportunity for autonomous authorization, avoiding fraud, and trea...

    Similar

    Human witnesses are insufficient to confirm such facts due to human te...72%If a negotiator has good reason to believe their adversary is misstati...70%If a person's motivationally biased strategy is sufficiently opaque to...70%A negotiator is not required to suffer a significant disadvantage rela...69%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: informed-consent
    View source passageHide passage
    When comprehension remains poor despite repeated efforts to elicit comprehension, what should investigators do? Is enlistment in a trial illegitimate, because no autonomous authorization took place (Faden and Beauchamp 1986; Candilis and Lidz 2010)? Some philosophers respond that it remains legitimate, because by giving candidates the opportunity to issue autonomous authorization, investigators do their parts (Sreenivasan 2003), avoid any potential fraud (Millum and Bromwich 2013), and treat the
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Valid consent requires actual understanding, not merely the opportunity for unde...
    When comprehension fails despite repeated efforts, investigators have epistemic ...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit