Human dignity and researcher conduct in emergency care research with incapacitated adults
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Emergency care research sometimes involves incapacitated adults as research participants. The ethical principle of respect for autonomy may not necessarily apply to an incapacitated person unable to act in an autonomous manner, although it can be argued that researchers still have a duty of respect towards such people because they have moral status despite being incapacitated. Sharing some common ground with theories of moral status based on ‘humanness’ and the ability for rational thought is the notion of human dignity, which features in arguments regarding researcher conduct with incapacitated patients. However, human dignity premised upon the unique ability of humans for rational thought and moral self-regulation is contingent upon these capabilities – a limitation that possibly makes dignity a less useful framework for research conduct in emergency care research. In this article, I will discuss the different conceptions of human dignity – as equality, status and virtue – and then draw on more recent literature that explains human dignity as a social constraint and as a factor influencing the conduct of healthcare professionals and researchers. I will address questions of whether dignity as a principle ought to apply only to those who have the ability to think rationally, or to all humans regardless of their condition or mental status. I will argue that, in relation to offering protection to research participants in emergency conditions, it is immaterial which view is taken.
Article Details
Issue
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The SAJBL is published under an Attribution-Non Commercial International Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC 4.0) License. Under this license, authors agree to make articles available to users, without permission or fees, for any lawful, non-commercial purpose. Users may read, copy, or re-use published content as long as the author and original place of publication are properly cited.
Exceptions to this license model is allowed for UKRI and research funded by organisations requiring that research be published open-access without embargo, under a CC-BY licence. As per the journals archiving policy, authors are permitted to self-archive the author-accepted manuscript (AAM) in a repository.
How to Cite
References
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. Act No. 108 of 1996.
South Africa. National Health Act No. 61 of 2003.
National Department of Health, South Africa. Ethics in Health Research: Principles,
Processes and Structures. Pretoria: NDoH, 2015.
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and
Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. Bethesda: National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, 1978.
Beauchamp T, Childress J. Respect for autonomy. In: Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 7th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2013:101-140.
Beauchamp T, Childress J. Moral status. In: Beauchamp T, Childress J. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 7th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2013:62-94.
Singer P. Speciesism and moral status. Metaphilosophy 2009;40(3-4):567-581.
https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1467-9973.2009.01608.x
Macklin R. Dignity is a useless concept: It means no more than respect for persons or their autonomy. Br Med J 2003;327(7429):1419-1420. https://doi. org/10.1136%2Fbmj.327.7429.1419
Calhoun D. Human exceptionalism and the imago Dei: The tradition of human dignity. In: Dilley S, Palpant N, editors. Human Dignity in Bioethics: From Worldview to the Public Square. New York: Routledge; 2013:19-48.
Byleveld D, Brownsword R. Human Dignity in Bioethics and Biolaw. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.
Sulmasy DP. The varieties of human dignity: A logical and conceptual analysis. Med Heal Care Philos 2013;16(4):937-944. https://doi. org/10.1007%2Fs11019-012-9400-1
Griffin M. Dignity in Roman and Stoic thought. In: Debes R, ed. Dignity: A History. New York: Oxford University Press, 2017:47-65.
Henry LM. Deciphering dignity. Am J Bioethics 2010;10(7):59-61. https://doi. org/10.1080%2F15265161003728837
Rosen M. Dignity: Its History and Meaning. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2012.
Schroeder D. Dignity: Two riddles and four concepts. Cambridge Q Healthcare Ethics 2008;17(2):230-238. https://doi.org/10.1017%2Fs0963180108080262
Killmister S. Dignity: Not such a useless concept. J Med Ethics 2010;36(3):160-164.
https://doi.org/10.1136%2Fjme.2009.031393
Beauchamp TL. Philosophical Ethics. 3rd ed. Boston: McGraw Hill, 2001.
Van Hooft S. Understanding Virtue Ethics. New York: Routledge, 2014.
Jones DA. Human dignity in healthcare: A virtue ethics approach. New Bioethics
;21(1):87-97. https://doi.org/10.1179%2F2050287715z.00000000059
World Medical Association. WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. Helsinki: WMA, 2013. https:// www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for- medical-research-involving-human-subjects/ (accessed 10 May 2020).
National Department of Health, South Africa. South African Good Clinical Practice: Clinical Trial Guidelines. Pretoria: NDoH, 2020.
Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences. Clinical Research in Resource-limited Settings. Geneva: CIOMS, 2021.
Macklin R. Bioethics, vulnerability and protection. Bioethics 2003;17(5-6):472- 486. https://doi.org/10.1111%2F1467-8519.00362