138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18445091)
1. Free riders and pious sons--why science research remains obligatory.
Chan S; Harris J
Bioethics; 2009 Mar; 23(3):161-71. PubMed ID: 18445091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Participation in biomedical research is an imperfect moral duty: a response to John Harris.
Shapshay S; Pimple KD
J Med Ethics; 2007 Jul; 33(7):414-7. PubMed ID: 17601870
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. John Harris' argument for a duty to research.
Brassington I
Bioethics; 2007 Mar; 21(3):160-8. PubMed ID: 17845487
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Why participating in (certain) scientific research is a moral duty.
Stjernschantz Forsberg J; Hansson MG; Eriksson S
J Med Ethics; 2014 May; 40(5):325-8. PubMed ID: 23371315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The moral obligation to be vaccinated: utilitarianism, contractualism, and collective easy rescue.
Giubilini A; Douglas T; Savulescu J
Med Health Care Philos; 2018 Dec; 21(4):547-560. PubMed ID: 29429063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Defending the duty to research?
Brassington I
Bioethics; 2011 Jan; 25(1):21-6. PubMed ID: 19594723
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The obligation to participate in biomedical research.
Schaefer GO; Emanuel EJ; Wertheimer A
JAMA; 2009 Jul; 302(1):67-72. PubMed ID: 19567441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A duty to participate in research: does social context matter?
de Melo-Martin I
Am J Bioeth; 2008 Oct; 8(10):28-36. PubMed ID: 19003704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The principle of procreative beneficence: old arguments and a new challenge.
Hotke A
Bioethics; 2014 Jun; 28(5):255-62. PubMed ID: 22845855
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The case for a duty to research: not yet proven.
Brassington I
J Med Ethics; 2014 May; 40(5):329-30. PubMed ID: 23454720
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Is procreative beneficence obligatory?
Saunders B
J Med Ethics; 2015 Feb; 41(2):175-8. PubMed ID: 24523029
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Can there be a moral obligation to participate in biomedical research?
Seiler C
Eur J Clin Invest; 2018 Apr; 48(4):. PubMed ID: 29377101
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. In defense of the duty to participate in biomedical research.
Rhodes R
Am J Bioeth; 2008 Oct; 8(10):37-8. PubMed ID: 19003705
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Why genomics researchers are sometimes morally required to hunt for secondary findings.
Koplin JJ; Savulescu J; Vears DF
BMC Med Ethics; 2020 Jan; 21(1):11. PubMed ID: 32005225
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The fallacy of the Principle of Procreative Beneficence.
Bennett R
Bioethics; 2009 Jun; 23(5):265-73. PubMed ID: 18477055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Why "do no harm"?
Sharpe VA
Theor Med; 1997; 18(1-2):197-215. PubMed ID: 9129401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The re-emergence of the liberal-communitarian debate in bioethics: exercising self-determination and participation in biomedical research.
Christensen E
J Med Philos; 2012 Jun; 37(3):255-76. PubMed ID: 22556260
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. When intuition is not enough. Why the Principle of Procreative Beneficence must work much harder to justify its eugenic vision.
Bennett R
Bioethics; 2014 Nov; 28(9):447-55. PubMed ID: 23841936
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Challenging the Sanctity of Donorism: Patient Tissue Providers as Payment-Worthy Contributors.
Johnson RA; Wendler D
Kennedy Inst Ethics J; 2015 Sep; 25(3):291-333. PubMed ID: 26412739
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Trust and the duty of organ donation.
Almassi B
Bioethics; 2014 Jul; 28(6):275-83. PubMed ID: 24731143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
