The biobank consent debate: Why 'meta-consent' is still the solution!

Thomas Ploug*, Soren Holm

*Kontaktforfatter

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

17 Citationer (Scopus)

Abstract

In a recent article in the Journal of Medical Ethics, Neil Manson sets out to show that the meta-consent model of informed consent is not the solution to perennial debate on the ethics of biobank participation. In this response, we shall argue that (i) Manson's considerations on the costs of a meta-consent model are incomplete and therefore misleading; (ii) his view that a model of broad consent passes a threshold of moral acceptability rests on an analogy that misconstrues how biobank research is actually conducted and (iii) a model of meta-consent is more in tune with the nature of biobank research and enables autonomous choice.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftJournal of Medical Ethics
Vol/bind45
Udgave nummer5
Sider (fra-til)295-297
Antal sider3
ISSN0306-6800
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 1 maj 2019

Fingeraftryk

Dyk ned i forskningsemnerne om 'The biobank consent debate: Why 'meta-consent' is still the solution!'. Sammen danner de et unikt fingeraftryk.

Citationsformater