Matching Items (3)
Description
With the number of internationally-run clinical drug trials increasing, the double standards between those in developed nations and those in developing nations are being scrutinized under the ethical microscope. Many argue that several pharmaceutical companies and researchers are exploiting developing nation participants. Two issues of concern are the use of a placebo control when an effective alternative treatment exists and the lack of drug availability to the country that hosted the clinical trial should the experimental drug prove effective. Though intuitively this seems like an instance of exploitation, philosophically, exploitation theories cannot adequately account for the wrongdoing in these cases. My project has two parts. First, after explaining why the theories of Alan Wertheimer, John Lawrence Hill, and Ruth Sample fail to explain the exploitation in clinical drug research, I provide an alternative account of exploitation that can explain why the double standard in clinical research is harmful. Rather than craft a single theory encompassing all instances of exploitation, I offer an account of a type, or subset, of exploitation that I refer to as comparative exploitation. The double standards in clinical research fall under the category of comparative exploitation. Furthermore, while many critics maintain that cases of comparative exploitation, including clinical research, are mutually beneficial, they are actually harmful to its victims. I explain the harm of comparative exploitation using Ben Bradley's counterfactual account of harm and Larry May's theory of sharing responsibility. The second part of my project focuses on the "standard of care" argument, which most defenders use to justify the double standard in clinical research. I elaborate on Ruth Macklin's position that advocates of the "standard of care" position make three faulty assumptions: placebo-controlled trials are the gold standard, the only relevant question responsive to the host country's health needs is "Is the experimental product being studied better than the 'nothing' now available to the population?", and the only way of obtaining affordable products is to test cheap alternatives to replace the expensive ones. In the end, I advocate moving towards a universalizing of standards in order to avoid exploitation.
ContributorsFundora, Danielle (Author) / McGregor, Joan (Thesis advisor) / Brake, Elizabeth (Committee member) / Portmore, Douglas (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
This work is a mixed-methods study performed to evaluate the variance in patients’ hospital experiences at different stages of life. A survey of patients’ personal experience was designed based on information on healthcare practice from peer-reviewed journals and concepts from the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 2020). This study examined differences in how patients perceive memories of the hospital at the time of admission to the perception of their memories in the present day. The strength of association between past perceptions of overall experience with various aspects of the hospital experience was analyzed by calculating eta. The percent of variance in perception of experience that is explained by each aspect of the experience was then calculated by eta squared. Results were separated by age group at the time of admission to determine factors most likely to affect each group’s experience. Age groups 10 years and younger and 11-14 years were both concerned with the atmosphere of the hospital. All groups complained about their quality of sleep and the quality of the food, however, a majority of the complaints came from age groups 15-17 years and 18-21 years. The four age groups from 22-35+ years did not have enough participants to draw age specific conclusions by themselves and were therefore combined into one group, 22+ years. The 22+ years age group complained the most about noise, they complained about day noise in addition to night noise.
ContributorsChow, Tiffany (Author) / Dykstra, LeAnn (Thesis director) / O'Brien, Janet (Committee member) / Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2020-12
Description
Barbara Seaman was a writer, investigator, and advocate for female healthcare rights during the twentieth century in the United States. Seaman’s work addressed the gendered prejudice she observed in the US healthcare system and argued that women of the 1960s lacked the proper tools to make informed decisions about pregnancy care, breastfeeding, childbirth, and contraception. Seaman wrote the book The Doctor’s Case Against the Pill in 1969 to expose the dangers in prescribing and consuming high doses of estrogen in the form of birth control. Seaman’s objective was to expose what she described as pharmaceutical companies’ drive for profit over safety. Her reporting helped provide a voice to many women who lacked proper health information and helped improve the standard of healthcare that women received in the US. Through her publications and activism, Seaman brought women’s healthcare to the public’s attention and contributed to the feminist and women’s healthcare movements of the twentieth century.
ContributorsHorwitz, Rainey (Author) / Lienhard, Dina A. (Editor) / Arizona State University. School of Life Sciences. Center for Biology and Society. Embryo Project Encyclopedia. (Publisher) / Arizona Board of Regents (Publisher)
Created2018-05-25