Chapter 4 focuses on evaluating arguments which grant the concerns raised by nonbeneficial pediatric research, and then try to meet Ramsey's challenge. The chapter first considers Utilitarian justifications and why they are rightly rejected. It then considers the argument that nonbeneficial pediatric research can be justified when it is consistent with the parents’ rights to make decisions for their children. Next is the argument that participation in nonbeneficial research can be in children's interests by teaching them to be moral. While this argument does not provide a general justification it does reveal that a response to Ramsey's challenge need not be based on the potential for participating children to realize clinical benefits in particular. This suggestion will be pursued in subsequent chapters. Chapter 4 ends by considering whether it is possible to meet Ramsey's challenge by appeal to a variation on the Rawlsian approach of evaluating what policies are appropriate based on which policies a reasonable person would endorse from behind a veil of ignorance.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.