Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1281059
 
 

Footnotes (283)



 


 



Non-Beneficial Pediatric Research and the Best Interests Standard: A Legal and Ethical Reconciliation


Paul Litton


University of Missouri School of Law

October 8, 2008

University of Missouri School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2008-27
Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law, and Ethics, Vol. 8, p. 359, 2008

Abstract:     
Federal efforts beginning in the 1990's have successfully increased pediatric research to improve medical care for all children. Since 1997, the FDA has requested 800 pediatric studies involving 45,000 children. Much of this research is "non-beneficial"; that is, it exposes pediatric subjects to risk even though these children will not benefit from participating in the research. Non-beneficial pediatric research (NBPR) seems, by definition, contrary to the best interests of pediatric subjects, which is why one state supreme court has essentially prohibited it. It also appears that the only plausible rationale for this research is utilitarian, as it risks some children for the good of all. But that rationale is troubling.

This Article answers two related questions: (1) What is the appropriate legal relationship between NBPR and the "best interests of the child" standard? (2) What is the ethical justification for this research? I argue that courts should hold that the "best interests" standard governs pediatric research. But, contrary to existing case law, courts must consider the benefits to each child, including pediatric subjects, from a policy that permits NBPR, and not simply consider that a non-beneficial protocol presents more risk than potential benefit to a child. Moreover, I argue that the justification for the practice need not be utilitarian. There is no need to appeal to the greater good to justify the research because each child has reason to endorse a policy permitting NBPR where there is a very low ceiling on acceptable risk, and each child has reason to participate in a practice from which she benefits. More controversially, I argue that each child, like other persons, has reason to help others when she can do so at little to no cost to herself. The Article then highlights practical implications of the offered justifications.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 63

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: October 14, 2008  

Suggested Citation

Litton, Paul, Non-Beneficial Pediatric Research and the Best Interests Standard: A Legal and Ethical Reconciliation (October 8, 2008). University of Missouri School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2008-27; Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law, and Ethics, Vol. 8, p. 359, 2008. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1281059

Contact Information

Paul Litton (Contact Author)
University of Missouri School of Law ( email )
Missouri Avenue & Conley Avenue
Columbia, MO 65211
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 948
Downloads: 144
Download Rank: 119,517
Footnotes:  283

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.375 seconds