Undue Inducement and Disparate Impact: A Collectivist Account

Abstract

There is consensus that an inducement to participate in clinical research is undue if it compromises individual decision-making, thereby undermining voluntariness—a would-be research participant is made an excessive offer that prevents him or her from deciding well, however that is understood. I set forth and defend a view that conceptualizes inducements as undue if they result in the disparate enrollment of a protected class of individuals. I argue that this new conception avoids the problems with the standard view, is easy to operationalize, and clarifies the relation between exploitation and undue inducement.