Let's see what trouble Rose can get into today.

There is an article in the July 2009 issue of JAMA entitled, The Obligation to Participate in Biomedical Research. I would provide the link but, as JAMA is a subscription-only service, that would be against the rules. I would hope that JAMA is available to borrow from public libraries; one could also ask one's doctor.

Anyway, the article seems to represent a sea change in thinking. Here's an excerpt from the authors' overview, the sharing of which hopefully will not get me grounded till homecoming:

"The current prevailing view is that participation in biomedical research is above and beyond the call of duty....we propose a novel public goods argument for an obligation to participate....biomedical knowledge is a public good, available to any individual even if that individual does not contribute to it...Participation in research is a critical way to support an important public good....Consequently, all have a duty to participate...."

It's a good read.

Authors Schaefer, Emanuel and Wertheimer cover a lot of ground. They describe the standard view (participation is above and beyond the call of duty). They present 2 arguments for the obligation view: beneficence anid free-riding. Then they discuss implications of the obligation view: enforcement, personal obligation, cultural change, and paying others to participate in one's stead. Finally they consider likely objections.

What do you think?

Are we obligated to participate in research? If so, why? How much? What exceptions are there? If you've participated already, what inspired you?

Would so-called newbies or so-called old-timers be differently obligated? Parents of young children versus nonparents? Who would define the acceptable level and parameters of participation?

Do you wear your badge of participation proudly...why or why not? If you could somehow ensure that you didn't get the placebo would you? If you are able to access the therapy without the study would you? Why or why not? Is subcontracted (paid) participation ethical; does it get us off the hook? If yes, how so?

What other questions does this topic raise for you? Everyone is invited to reply based on your sense of ethics, philosophy or personal experience.

Rose