{"title":"使用、冒险和同意:为什么冒伤害旁观者的风险与冒伤害研究对象的风险在道德上是不同的","authors":"A. Walen","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2986587","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Subjects in studies on humans are used as a means of conducting the research and achieving whatever good would justify putting them at risk. Accordingly, consent must normally be obtained before subjects are exposed to any substantial risks to their welfare. Bystanders are also often put at risk, but they are not used as a means. Accordingly-or so I argue-consent is more often unnecessary before bystanders are exposed to similar substantial risks to their welfare.","PeriodicalId":286443,"journal":{"name":"AARN: Methods & Ethics in Cultural Anthropology (Topic)","volume":"72 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using, Risking, and Consent: Why Risking Harm to Bystanders Is Morally Different from Risking Harm to Research Subjects\",\"authors\":\"A. Walen\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2986587\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Subjects in studies on humans are used as a means of conducting the research and achieving whatever good would justify putting them at risk. Accordingly, consent must normally be obtained before subjects are exposed to any substantial risks to their welfare. Bystanders are also often put at risk, but they are not used as a means. Accordingly-or so I argue-consent is more often unnecessary before bystanders are exposed to similar substantial risks to their welfare.\",\"PeriodicalId\":286443,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AARN: Methods & Ethics in Cultural Anthropology (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"72 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AARN: Methods & Ethics in Cultural Anthropology (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2986587\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AARN: Methods & Ethics in Cultural Anthropology (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2986587","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Using, Risking, and Consent: Why Risking Harm to Bystanders Is Morally Different from Risking Harm to Research Subjects
Subjects in studies on humans are used as a means of conducting the research and achieving whatever good would justify putting them at risk. Accordingly, consent must normally be obtained before subjects are exposed to any substantial risks to their welfare. Bystanders are also often put at risk, but they are not used as a means. Accordingly-or so I argue-consent is more often unnecessary before bystanders are exposed to similar substantial risks to their welfare.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
