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

Thomas Ploug, Soren Holm

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

99 Downloads (Pure)


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.

Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Medical Ethics
Early online date14 Mar 2019
Publication statusPublished - 2019


Dive into the research topics of 'The biobank consent debate: why 'meta-consent' is still the solution!'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this