The Nuremberg Code and Informed Consent for Research

JAMA. 2018; 319(1): 85-86
Author: Jon F Merz
“The Viewpoint by Dr Moreno and colleagues understated the precedential value of the International Medical Tribunal’s decision in the trial of Nazi doctors accused of war crimes that established the Nuremberg Code and the code’s influence on common law development of the legal duty of researchers to secure informed consent from their research participants.”
Find letter here.

A libertarian case for mandatory vaccination

Journal of Medical Ethics 2018;44:37-43.
Author: J Brennan
“This paper argues that mandatory, government-enforced vaccination can be justified even within a libertarian political framework. If so, this implies that the case for mandatory vaccination is very strong indeed as it can be justified even within a framework that, at first glance, loads the philosophical dice against that conclusion. I argue that people who refuse vaccinations violate the ‘clean hands principle’, a (in this case, enforceable) moral principle that prohibits people from participating in the collective imposition of unjust harm or risk of harm.”
Find article here.

Karimi v Medical Council of New South Wales

Decision date: 20 December 2017
“OCCUPATIONS – medical practitioners – suspension of registration under s 150 of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law – external appeal under s 159 – nature of external appeal – allegations of professional misconduct, illegal prescribing, dispensing and storing of medication, inappropriate clinical record keeping, doctoring certificate and practising whilst unregistered – whether it is appropriate to terminate, vary or confirm period of suspension – period of suspension confirmed.”
Find decision here.

The UK Mental Capacity Act and consent to research participation: asking the right question

Journal of Medical Ethics 2018;44:44-46.
Author: P Willner
“This paper considers the meaning of the term ‘intrusive research’, as used in the UK Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), in relation to studies in which an informant is asked to provide information about or on behalf of a person who lacks capacity to consent, and who is not otherwise involved in the study. The MCA defines ‘intrusive research’ as research that would legally require consent if it involved people with capacity. The relevant ethical principles are that consent should be sought from people who would be affected by a piece of research and that this requirement should be implemented proportionately.”
Find article here.