Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T11:07:25.526Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Introduction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 January 2011

Zachary M. Schrag
Zachary M. Schrag*
Affiliation:
George Mason University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Policy History , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , January 2011 , pp. 1 - 5
Copyright
Copyright © Donald Critchlow and Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

1. Bradburd, Daniel, “Fuzzy Boundaries and Hard Rules: Unfunded Research and the IRB,” American Ethnologist 33 (November 2006): 494CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For links to news stories about current debates, see Illuminata, Inc., “News In Research With Human Subjects,” www.illuminata-inc.com/News.html.

2. Halpern, Sydney, “Hybrid Design, Systemic Rigidity: Institutional Dynamics in Human Research Oversight,” Regulation & Governance 2 (2008): 86CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fost, Norman and Levine, Robert J., “The Dysregulation of Human Subjects Research,” JAMA 298(14 November 2007): 2196–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

3. Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, Final Report (New York, 1996), 495; Schrag, Zachary M., Ethical Imperialism: Institutional Review Boards and the Social Sciences, 1965–2009 (Baltimore, 2010), 130–36.Google Scholar

4. Jeffrey Botkin, comments, Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Human Research Protections, Transcript, Sixteenth Meeting, 16 July 2008, 230–33, www.hhs.gov/ohrp/sachrp/ (16 July 2010); Nancy Walton, “The Thalidomide Tragedy,” Research Ethics Blog, 27 April 2010 http://researchethicsblog.com (16 July 2010).

5. Fitzgerald, Maureen H., “Punctuated Equilibrium, Moral Panics, and the Ethics Review Process,” Journal of Academic Ethics 2 (2005): 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6. See, for example, Reverby, Susan M., Examining Tuskegee: The Infamous Syphilis Study and Its Legacy (Chapel Hill, 2009)Google Scholar; Rothman, David J. and Rothman, Sheila M., The Willowbrook Wars: Bringing the Mentally Disabled into the Community (1984; reprint, New Brunswick, 2005)Google Scholar; Galliher, John F., Brekhus, Wayne H., and Keys, David P., Laud Humphreys: Prophet of Homosexuality and Sociology (Madison, 2004)Google Scholar; and the various works cited by the articles in this issue.

7. United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, “The Doctors Trial,” www.ushmm.org/research/doctors/ (30 July 2010).

8. Schrag, Ethical Imperialism.

9. Petryna, Adriana, When Experiments Travel: Clinical Trials and the Global Search for Human Subjects (Princeton, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Abadie, Roberto, The Professional Guinea Pig: Big Pharma and the Risky World of Human Subjects (Durham, 2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar