Carvalho Fatima Lampreia
Marie Curie Excellence Grant Team, Department of Sociology, University of Sussex.
Bioethics. 2007 Jun;21(5):290-302. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2007.00555.x.
This article presents an overview of the Portuguese transposition of the European Directive on Good Clinical Practice (2001/20/E) concerning scientific and academic debates on bioethics and clinical investigation. Since the Directive was transposed into Portuguese law by its National Assembly, the bureaucracy of clinical trials has been ever more complex. Despite demands for swift application processes by the Pharmaceutical industry, supported by the European Parliament, the Directive's transcription to the national law has not always delivered the expected outcome. However, this has led to an increased number of applications for clinical trials in Portuguese hospitals. In this article I revise bioethical publications and decree-laws enabling an informed appraisal of the anxieties and prospects for the implementation of the clinical trials Directive in Portugal. This article also places the European Directive in the field of sociology of bioethics, arguing that Portuguese bioethical institutions differ from those of the US, and also from Northern European counterparts. The main divergence is that those people in Portugal who claim expertise in 'legal' bioethics do not dominate either the bureaucratic structure of research or ethics committees for health. Even experts in the applied ethics field now claim that 'professional bioethicists do not exist'. The recent creation of a national Ethics Committee for Clinical Investigation (CEIC) in line with the European Directive on Good Clinical Practice (GCP) will not change the present imbalance between different professional jurisdictions in the national bioethical debate in Portugal.
本文概述了葡萄牙对欧洲《良好临床实践指令》(2001/20/E)的转化情况,涉及生物伦理与临床研究方面的科学及学术辩论。自该指令由葡萄牙国民议会转化为葡萄牙法律以来,临床试验的官僚程序愈发复杂。尽管在欧洲议会的支持下,制药行业要求加快审批流程,但该指令转化为国内法律后,并非总能产生预期效果。不过,这使得葡萄牙医院的临床试验申请数量有所增加。在本文中,我回顾了生物伦理出版物及法令,以便对葡萄牙实施临床试验指令的忧虑与前景进行明智评估。本文还将欧洲指令置于生物伦理社会学领域进行探讨,认为葡萄牙的生物伦理机构既不同于美国,也有别于北欧国家的同类机构。主要差异在于,在葡萄牙,那些自称具有“合法”生物伦理专业知识的人,在研究官僚结构或健康伦理委员会中并未占据主导地位。就连应用伦理领域的专家如今也宣称“不存在专业生物伦理学家”。近期依据欧洲《良好临床实践指令》(GCP)设立的国家临床研究伦理委员会(CEIC),并不会改变葡萄牙国内生物伦理辩论中不同专业管辖权之间目前的失衡状况。