Advertisement
AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow purchase articles
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Right arrow Get other permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Glantz, L. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Glantz, L. H.
Related Collections
Right arrow Ethics
Right arrow Health Policy
Right arrow Other Child and Adolescent Health
Right arrow Other Statistics/Evaluation/Research
July 2002, Vol 92, No. 7 | American Journal of Public Health 1070-1073
© 2002 American Public Health Association

HEALTH POLICY AND ETHICS FORUM

Nontherapeutic Research with Children: Grimes v Kennedy Krieger Institute

Leonard H. Glantz, JD

Leonard H. Glantz is Professor of Health Law at the Boston University School of Public Health. Requests for reprints should be sent to Leonard H. Glantz, JD, Boston University School of Public Health, 715 Albany St T-3, Boston, MA 02215 (e-mail: lglantz{at}bu.edu).

Research with young children raises difficult issues of law and ethics. A recent Maryland case, Grimes v Kennedy Krieger Institute, Inc, appears to impose restrictive rules on research with children when the subjects are put at risk but cannot derive direct benefit from their involvement in the research project. This case exemplifies the tension that exists between the goal of science to increase knowledge and the protection of the rights and welfare of nonconsenting research subjects. While some language in the opinion may be difficult to understand or apply, for the most part the case reflects the problems other courts and ethicists have had in delineating the role of children in "nontherapeutic" research. (Am J Public Health. 2002;92:1070–1073)




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Arch Pediatr Adolesc MedHome page
D. Wendler and T. Jenkins
Children's and Their Parents' Views on Facing Research Risks for the Benefit of Others
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, January 1, 2008; 162(1): 9 - 14.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch Pediatr Adolesc MedHome page
R. H. Pasternak, G. Geller, C. Parrish, and T. L. Cheng
Adolescent and parent perceptions on youth participation in risk behavior research.
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, November 1, 2006; 160(11): 1159 - 1166.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 AJPHHome page
D. R. Buchanan and F. G. Miller
Justice and Fairness in the Kennedy Krieger Institute Lead Paint Study: the Ethics of Public Health Research on Less Expensive, Less Effective Interventions
Am J Public Health, May 1, 2006; 96(5): 781 - 787.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Med. EthicsHome page
M Spriggs
Canaries in the mines: children, risk, non-therapeutic research, and justice
J. Med. Ethics, April 1, 2004; 30(2): 176 - 181.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 AJPHHome page
R. P. Wedeen
ETHICS IN PUBLIC HEALTH INSTITUTIONS
Am J Public Health, December 1, 2002; 92(12): 1884 - 1885.
[Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2002 by the American Public Health Association