What should recognition entail? Responding to the reification of autonomy and vulnerability in medical research

Research output: Contribution to journalCommentary/debatepeer-review

16 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Smajdor argues that “recognition” is the solution to the “reifying attitude” that results from “the urge to protect ‘vulnerable’ people through exclusion from research”. Drawing on theories of reification, we argue that it is the concepts of autonomy and vulnerability themselves that have been reified, resulting in the impoverishment of approaches to autonomy at law and in research ethics. Overcoming such reification demands a deeper consideration of the grounds on which vulnerable individuals are owed recognition and thereby the forms such recognition should take. Smajdor argues for a recognition that appeals to autonomy and that manifests in providing vulnerable individuals with the opportunity to assent. The problem is that this kind of recognition is dependent on a more fundamental kind. It is this second form of recognition that would need to do the heavy lifting for assent-based frameworks to avoid the same problems we find with consent.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)491-492
JournalJournal of Medical Ethics
Volume49
Issue number7
Early online date12 Apr 2023
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 22 Jun 2023

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'What should recognition entail? Responding to the reification of autonomy and vulnerability in medical research'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this