PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Ruth Faden

Publications and source records attributed to Ruth Faden.

16 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Factors that affect infertility patients' decisions about disposition of frozen embryos.

OBJECTIVE: To describe factors that affect infertility patients' decision making regarding their cryopreserved embryos. DESIGN: Forty-six semistructured in-depth interviews of individuals and couples participating in IVF programs. SETTING: Two major southeastern academic medical centers. PATIENT(S): Fifty-three individuals, including 31 women, 8 men, and 7 couples. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Qualitative analysis of interview transcripts. INTERVENTION (S): None. RESULT(S): Seven broad themes informed participants' decisions about embryo disposition: family and personal issues, trust, definition of the embryo, prospective responsibility to the embryo, responsibility to society, adequacy of information, and lack of acceptable disposition options. Many wished for alternative options, such as a ceremony at the time of disposal or placement of embryos in the woman's body when pregnancy was unlikely. CONCLUSION(S): Recent debates regarding embryo disposition do not reflect the range of values that infertility patients consider when deciding about frozen embryos. In addition to questions about the embryo's moral status, decision making about embryos is informed by a range of factors in the lives of individuals who created them. These perspectives may have important implications for the content and timing of informed consent, facilitating embryo disposition, and advancing policy debates about the ethics of frozen embryo use.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Oversight of human participants research: identifying problems to evaluate reform proposals.

The oversight of research involving human participants is widely believed to be inadequate. The U.S. Congress, national commissions, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Institute of Medicine, numerous professional societies, and others are proposing remedies based on the assumption that the main problems are researchers' conflict of interest, lack of institutional review board (IRB) resources, and the volume and complexity of clinical research. Developing appropriate reform proposals requires carefully delineating the problems of the current system to know what reforms are needed. To stimulate a more informed and meaningful debate, we delineate 15 current problems into 3 broad categories. First, structural problems encompass 8 specific problems related to the way the research oversight system is organized. Second, procedural problems constitute 5 specific problems related to the operations of IRB review. Finally, performance assessment problems include 2 problems related to absence of systematic assessment of the outcomes of the oversight system. We critically assess proposed reforms, such as accreditation and central IRBs, according to how well they address these 15 problems. None of the reforms addresses all 15 problems. Indeed, most focus on the procedural problems, failing to address either the structure or the performance assessment problems. Finally, on the basis of the delineation of problems, we outline components of a more effective reform proposal, including bringing all research under federal oversight, a permanent advisory committee to address recurrent ethical issues in clinical research, mandatory single-time review for multicenter research protocols, additional financial support for IRB functions, and a standardized system for collecting and disseminating data on both adverse events and the performance assessment of IRBs.

Accreditation↗
PubMed2004

"Special scrutiny": a targeted form of research protocol review.

Research participants require ongoing protection of the kind already established in law and regulation. However, "special scrutiny" for certain types of research is also needed. Three criteria for special scrutiny are 1) research that involves initial experiences of translating new scientific advances into humans, especially when the intervention is novel, irreversible, or both; 2) research with a known or credible risk for significant harm (death or serious disability are the clearest examples) to research participants as a consequence of the experimental intervention and with no potential for offsetting direct medical benefit; or 3) research with a protocol that raises ethical questions about research design or implementation for which there is no consensus. Special scrutiny recognizes that not all research protocols are equally ethically challenging and aims to provide appropriate protection for all research participants.

Ethical Review↗
PubMed2004

The limitations of "vulnerability" as a protection for human research participants.

Vulnerability is one of the least examined concepts in research ethics. Vulnerability was linked in the Belmont Report to questions of justice in the selection of subjects. Regulations and policy documents regarding the ethical conduct of research have focused on vulnerability in terms of limitations of the capacity to provide informed consent. Other interpretations of vulnerability have emphasized unequal power relationships between politically and economically disadvantaged groups and investigators or sponsors. So many groups are now considered to be vulnerable in the context of research, particularly international research, that the concept has lost force. In addition, classifying groups as vulnerable not only stereotypes them, but also may not reliably protect many individuals from harm. Certain individuals require ongoing protections of the kind already established in law and regulation, but attention must also be focused on characteristics of the research protocol and environment that present ethical challenges.

Child↗
PubMed2000

Inequalities in health, inequalities in health care: four generations of discussion about justice and cost-effectiveness analysis.

The focus of questions of justice in health policy has shifted during the last 20 years, beginning with questions about rights to health care, and then, by the late 1980s, turning to issues of rationing. More recently, attention has focused on alternatives to cost-effectiveness analysis. In addition, health inequalities, and not just inequalities in access to health care, have become the subject of moral analysis. This article examines how such trends have transformed the philosophical landscape and encouraged some in bioethics to seek guidance on normative questions from outside of the contours of traditional philosophical arguments about justice.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed1997

Managed care and informed consent.

Arguments for efficiency in health care delivery have been used to support some level of withholding of information about available treatment options from patients in managed care systems. To the extent that such arguments prevail, they may necessitate changes in the established understanding of and commitment to informed consent and the disclosure of information to patients.

Contracts↗
PubMed1993

Reproductive genetic testing and the ethics of parenting.

This paper examines whether and to what extent parents are morally bound to seek reproductive genetic testing. It is concluded that, with rare exceptions, there is no requirement in parenting to seek or accept reproductive genetic testing if the only actions facilitated by such testing are abortion, selective conception or remaining childless. Commitments to other family members or to oneself can provide other, morally or prudentially compelling reasons to elect genetic testing and selective abortion in these circumstances.

Abortion, Eugenic↗