对《日常生活的风险》的辩护
A Defense of The-Risks-of-Daily-Life.
作者信息
Binik Ariella
出版信息
Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2017;27(3):413-442. doi: 10.1353/ken.2017.0033.
Research examining the safe and effective treatment of diseases and disorders affecting children offers one of the best prospects for improving the medical treatment of children. But the inclusion of children in research raises difficult ethical questions, among them: To how much risk is it permissible to expose children in research? Various thresholds have been proposed to constrain research risks that do not offer children the prospect of direct medical benefit. These proposals include limiting research risks to (1) the risks of routine medical examinations, (2) the risks of participation in charitable activities, (3) the risks of family life, and (4) the risks-of-daily-life. I examine which, if any, of these proposals is defensible. I argue that only the risks-of-daily-life threshold is defensible and I offer a new justification for this risk threshold. I argue that the risks of daily life are justifiable because they are part of a reasonable trade-off between personal safety and our ability to pursue meaningful lives.
研究影响儿童的疾病和病症的安全有效治疗方法，为改善儿童医疗提供了最佳前景之一。但将儿童纳入研究引发了棘手的伦理问题，其中包括：在研究中让儿童承受多大风险是可以接受的？人们提出了各种阈值来限制那些无法为儿童带来直接医疗益处的研究风险。这些提议包括将研究风险限制在：（1）常规医学检查的风险；（2）参与慈善活动的风险；（3）家庭生活的风险；（4）日常生活的风险。我将探讨这些提议中哪些（如果有的话）是合理的。我认为只有日常生活风险阈值是合理的，并为这一风险阈值提供了新的理由。我认为日常生活风险是合理的，因为它们是个人安全与我们追求有意义生活的能力之间合理权衡的一部分。
Zotero 插件