Website Region:

6

Ethics

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliations

Instructor

Course

Date

Ethics

Question one

Engaging in a clinical trial as a volunteer can assist an individual in taking a proactive responsibility in healthcare in an environment that encourages personal relationships with researchers, physicians, and the staff. Besides, participants mostly learn a few new things about their health, which makes it beneficial. In some instances, participants are sometimes paid to participate, but it relies on the type of trial (Steel, Marchand, & Oviedo-Joekes, 2017). While there is a financial or economical attachment on voluntary clinical trial participation, helping the world and the nation is the most vital facet for a volunteer. Many health and medical procedures and drugs commence with a clinical trial. In other words, modern healthcare may not advance or progress if not for a clinical trial; as a participant, such issues are made possible.

Question 2

It is unethical to oversimplify information in informed consent. The concept of informed consent is born from ethical guidelines of patient autonomy and the fundamental human rights (Manti, & Licari, 2018). It is the right of the patient to decide what should happen or should not to their body and to gather any form of information between engaging in any test, procedure or surgery. Not any other person has the right and liberty to coerce the patient to behave or conduct in a certain way (Steel, Marchand, & Oviedo-Joekes, 2017). Besides, even a doctor can only function as a facilitator in the decision-making process of the patient.

Question 3

Coercion happens when an implicit or overt threat of harm is presented one individual to another intentionally in an effort meant to obtain compliance. For instance, a federal investigative agent may inform the potential subject that they will lose access to some of the requited health services if they fail to participate in a clinical trial or research

Part 2

Question 1

The inclusion of rats, mice and birds in redundant federal legislation will hamper the progress of behavioral and biomedical research with laboratory animals. Birds, mice and rats encompass ninety-five per cent of nonhuman animals employed in lab research. Besides, they were already legible for ample oversight via the national institutes of HEALTH, Accreditation of Laboratory Animal care and the Association for Assessment fort animals (Percie du Sert et al., 2020). Besides, regulating these animals would prohibitively increase the routine costs of animal maintenance and care without any significant change in animal treatment and laboratory animal care

Question 2

Most experiments on animals are done due to curiosity, and some of them contribute little or no meaningful evidence to medical advances. Some do not even hold any form of promise for curing diseases. The primary reason people believe that these experiments are vital for human health is due to experimenters, media , universities and lobbying groups that exaggerate the potential they possess in leading new research areas and the role they played in previous medical advances. Besides, the notion that if animals are not used, the drugs will need to be tested on people is beyond factual (Percie du Sert et al., 2020). In the current contemporary society, drug testing is already done on people. Regardless of the tests and experiments on animals, someone will be the first to receive a test. Since tests on animals are unreliable, such issues make human trials riskier.

Question 3

Scientists at universities, private companies and government agencies are creating new tissue and cell tests, computer algorithms and other sophisticated techniques to replace existing animal’s tests (Cheluvappa, Scowen, & Eri, 2017). The choices are not only crucial in safeguarding human life; they also tend to be rapid, reliable and cost-effective relative to the traditional animal experiments

Part 3

Question 1

Conflict of commitment is a situation where a researcher or predoctoral trainee is dedicating time personal issues more than the time allocated or allowed by the institutional policy. In other words, the person is engaging much of their time on other activities outside the predoctoral trainee requirements (Sleeswijk Visser, 2018). The primary issue here is not judgmental bias or financial constraint, but whether that individual’s time commitment and effort align with the interests and responsibility of the institutions. There is a need for the researcher to focus on the essential matters at hand that encompass the interests and objective o0f the institution.

Question 2

The board of editors is experiencing increasing pressure to leverage trust and reassure researchers and the members of the public that traditional peer review is fail-safe, robust and corrective. In some instances, their hidden conflicts of interests may also affect the reliability of the research and jeopardize the fairness of the publishing process since they could permit status of professional and personal, relationships to positively impact the outcome of the peer review (Sleeswijk Visser, 2018). It might sometimes also hinder or hamper the processing period of the editorial procedure.

Question 3

The first step is to explore the essential facets of collaboration. The collaborating team should explore and deliberate on authorship and publication. They should also agree on how the decision-making process will occur, how the authorship, the process will take place and how data will be shared (Sleeswijk Visser, 2018). The persona rtepresent5ing the research project on the media, and other essential elements should also be explored. There should also be a clear structural framework on how conflicts and any form of disagreements will be solved.

References

Cheluvappa, R., Scowen, P., & Eri, R. (2017). Ethics of animal research in human disease remediation, its institutional teaching; and alternatives to animal experimentation. Pharmacology research & perspectives, 5(4), e00332.

Manti, S., & Licari, A. (2018). How to obtain informed consent for research. Breathe, 14(2), 145-152.

Percie du Sert, N., Ahluwalia, A., Alam, S., Avey, M. T., Baker, M., Browne, W. J., ... & Garner, P. (2020). Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0. PLoS biology, 18(7), e3000411.

Sleeswijk Visser, F. (2018). Structuring roles in Research through Design collaboration. DRS 2018, 1.

Steel, D., Marchand, K., & Oviedo-Joekes, E. (2017). Our life depends on this drug: Competence, inequity, and voluntary consent in clinical trials on supervised injectable opioid assisted treatment. The American Journal of Bioethics, 17(12), 32-40.