Wiertz Svenja
Public Health Ethics. 2023 Dec 12;16(3):261-270. doi: 10.1093/phe/phad025. eCollection 2023 Nov.
The article discusses the impact different concepts of solidarity can have on debates on models of consent for non-interventional research. It introduces three concepts of solidarity that have been referenced in bioethical debates: a purely descriptive concept, a concept that claims some derivative value for most but not all practices of solidarity, as well as a clearly normative concept where solidarity is tied to justice and taken to ground moral duties. It shows that regarding the rivalling models of study-specific consent, tiered consent and broad consent, the first two concepts can be taken to favour tiered consent while only normative solidarity supports a model of broad consent-or an argument to allow non-interventional research without requiring consent at all. As normative solidarity is tied to considerations of justice, however, the argument appears less straightforward than one might expect: It presupposes that the research contributes to overcoming existing social injustices.
本文讨论了不同的团结概念对非介入性研究同意模式辩论可能产生的影响。它介绍了生物伦理辩论中提到的三种团结概念:一个纯粹描述性的概念、一个声称团结的大多数(但不是全部)实践具有某种衍生价值的概念,以及一个明确的规范性概念,其中团结与正义相关联并被视为道德义务的基础。文章表明,对于特定研究同意、分层同意和广泛同意这几种相互竞争的模式,前两个概念倾向于支持分层同意,而只有规范性团结支持广泛同意模式——或者支持一种允许非介入性研究而根本无需同意的观点。然而,由于规范性团结与正义考量相关联,该观点似乎不如人们预期的那么直接:它预先假定该研究有助于克服现有的社会不公正现象。