Research involving adults lacking the capacity to consent Legal, ethical and practical issues Dr Mikey Dunn Senior Research Associate in Health and Social.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Reconciling the sharing of research data with ethical review for research with people as participants Dr Veerle Van den Eynden UK Data Archive Data support.
Advertisements

Dr Birgit Whitman, Research Governance Manager Ethical policies.
An informed consent process for people with learning disabilities and their carers Dr Anita Young Health Services Research Group The Robert Gordon University.
The Research Ethics Process RPT Conference 28 th April 2006.
The HPSS Research Ethics Service Northern Ireland Dr Siobhan McGrath Office for Research Ethics Committees Northern Ireland Mar2007.
Research Policy & Management RACD INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH GOVERNANCE.
Good Clinical Practice in Research Clinical Trial Regulations
B71P02 - Foundations in EBP Introduction to Healthcare Law and EBP.
Research involving adults lacking the capacity to consent 2. Legal and governance requirements.
Ethics Relating to Children in Research in FP7
An Introduction to the Ethics Review Procedure Lindsay Unwin: Research & Innovation Services, UREC Secretary.
Ethics Approval for Projects based overseas George Ellison (Director) Research & Graduate School
Understanding Research Ethics Dr Meera Warrier Research Development Coordinator Academic Practice
We’re supporting people who use services, and carers May 2011 Learning to live with risk (1) An introduction for service providers in adult social care.
Post-trial Access to Treatment by Patients participating in Clinical Trials Presented by Dr T K S Letlape Chairman: South African Medical Association President-Elect:
Subject Selection and Recruitment David Wendler Department of Clinical Bioethics NIH, USA.
MCA DoLS a view from the CQC. The Mental Capacity Act is the essential framework for balancing FREEDOM (wherever possible) with PROTECTION (when essential,
Responsible Sponsorship A case study Dr Birgit Whitman, Head of Research Governance.
Use of Children as Research Subjects What information should be provided for an FP7 ethical review?
Managing Sponsorship Research Services University of Oxford.
Developing information for participants in your research – getting started This presentation contains some exercises to help you get started. You can do.
Ethical Treatment of Participants in Studies of Online Behaviors Barbara M. Wildemuth School of Information & Library Science University of North Carolina.
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم. THE TITLE “INTRODUCTION”
Scientific Data Management for the Protection of Human Subjects Robert R. Downs NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC) Center for International.
Ethics in research involving human subjects
The Nuffield Council on Bioethics Report : The collection, linking and use of data in biomedical research and health care: ethical issues. Martin Richards.
Human Subject Research Ethics
Applying to a Research Ethics Committee
International Research & Research Involving Children K. Lynn Cates, MD Assistant Chief Research & Development Officer Office of Research & Development.
Human Research Ethics and Obtaining Ethics Approval
What makes Clinical Research Ethical? Dr Enoka Corea Co-secretary, ERC Faculty of Medicine, Colombo.
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD HISTORY AND ETHICS. 2 Ethical History : Holocaust : Nuremburg Trials 1964: Declaration of Helsinki :
INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH ETHICS IN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK
The work of the Research Ethics Committee Dr Carol Chu.
1 Conducting Psychology Experiments & Ethics of Experimentation.
“What’s Ethics Got To Do With It” Presentation to the Canberra Evaluation Forum Gary Kent Head Governance Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.
The Global Health Network Marijke Geldenhuys 19 September 2014 Adhering to the GCP Principles.. what does that even mean?
Mental Capacity – a REC chair’s Perspective Jan Downer Chair London-Harrow REC.
Professor David Stanley Northumbria University.  “Human participants or subjects are defined as including living human beings, human beings who have.
R&D – a perspective Dr Nana Theodorou Research Coordinator Sheffield Clinical Research Office.
Ethics in pharmacy practice
Breach reporting to the REC Catherine Blewett, HRA Improvement & Liaison Manager.
Retha Britz Copyright 2013 All rights reserved for this presentation 1 Other important considerations for RECs Retha Britz.
Guidance Training CFR §483.75(i) F501 Medical Director.
Presented at the Arthritis Advisory Committee meeting on July 15, 2003 by Hugh Davies, M.D.
Cultural Competence Considerations [and other alliterations] in International Research IRB 2 Continuing Education March 10, 2015.
- Social and Scientific Values - Social and Scientific Values - Scientific Validity - Scientific Validity - Fair Subject Selection - Fair Subject Selection.
ETHICAL ISSUES AND INFORMED CONSENT Juan M. Lozano, MD, MSc Department of Paediatrics and Clinical Epidemiology Unit School of Medicine, Javeriana University.
Community surgery : staying out of trouble. Miss Nicola Lennard : 12 June 2015:
Pediatric Research Ethics and the Research Subject Advocate Tomas Jose Silber, MD, MASS RSA and Director, Office of Ethics, CNMC Professor of Pediatrics,
21 CFR Toby A. Silverman, M.D. Branch Chief, Clinical Review Branch Division of Hematology, Office of Blood December 14, 2006.
Understanding the Mental Capacity Act David Neal Head of Policy, NRES.
8 th November 2007 Research: ethics and research governance Rossana Dowsett Research and Regional Development Division [Pre Award Support] University of.
Introduction to Research Governance, Ethics and Integrity Mrs April Lockyer Senior Research Policy Officer (Governance and Integrity)
Health and Social Care Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
Research ethics.
Quality Metrics of Performance of Research Ethics Committees Cristina E. Torres, PhD FERCAP Coordinator.
SOCIAL CARE RESEARCH AND NHS RECs Professor Jan Pahl University of Kent Contact:
Mental Capacity Act 2005 overview for Falls Conference.
Research Ethics Dr Nichola Seare Aston Health Research & Innovation Cluster.
Back to Basics – Approval Criteria
Reconsidering requirements for research ethics in Lithuania
Risk Determinations and Research with Children
Good Clinical Practice
Jeffrey M. Cohen, Ph.D. CIP President HRP Associates, Inc.
Research Ethics Matthew Billington
Research Ethics and Integrity Officer
Rieke van der Graaf PhD UMC Utrecht, Julius Center
Research, Experimentation, & Clinical Trials
Ethical Theories and Principles in Clinical and Research
Presentation transcript:

Research involving adults lacking the capacity to consent Legal, ethical and practical issues Dr Mikey Dunn Senior Research Associate in Health and Social Care Ethics The Ethox Centre University of Oxford

Outline of the workshop 1.A brief introduction: The ethical underpinnings of research involving adults lacking the capacity to consent 2.Specific legal and governance requirements 3.Case-based discussion of challenges in translating these requirements into individual project protocols 4.Open Q&A

Research involving adults lacking the capacity to consent 1. A brief introduction

Introduction All research involving human participants is subject to ethical review through a complex set of governance arrangements Research ethics committees can give approval for a study to go ahead, require amendments to be made, or give an unfavourable opinion What justifies the ethical review process process?

3 arguments for research ethics governance 1.The libertarian argument (rights-based) a)The value of research participants autonomy and freedoms b)Places focus on the validity of consent c)If consent has been obtained, the research is ethically justified to proceed 2.The paternalistic argument (duty-based) a)The value of the researchers duties in relation to participants b)One duty would be to ensure that the participant is not exposed to a more than minimal risk of harm c)Participant autonomy can be over-ridden in order to fulfil this duty 3.The utilitarian argument (consequence-based) a)Emphasises the outcome of the research taking place b)Balances the benefits and harms to participants and people in the future c)Non-consensual research that harms participants might be permitted if it will lead to considerable future benefits

3 arguments for research ethics governance Research ethics governance frameworks are founded in the paternalistic position, but also incorporate elements of the other two arguments The core principle of the Governance Arrangements for Research Ethics Committees (GAfREC) in England is to: protect the dignity, rights, safety and well-being of all actual or potential research participants Thus, research ethics review focuses on: 1.The quality of consent procedures 2.Whether appropriate protections are in place for participants 3.The quality of the science, and the likelihood for future benefits

Applying the arguments in relation to participants lacking the capacity to consent Involving children or adults who lack the capacity to give consent (LCC) to take part in a study cause problems for all of these requirements to be met 1.How are the rights of adults LCC to be reconciled within an autonomy based consent process? 2.What additional duties to protect adults LCC are required? 3.Can involving adults LCC still produce research that has useful and beneficial outcomes? Additional protections and procedures need to be put in place to justify inclusion of adults LCC

Two starting points 1.Different laws regulate different kinds of research involving adults LCC differently Separate governance arrangements are in place for different kinds of research Key distinction: clinical trials of investigational medicinal products (CTIMP) and non-CTIMP research Requirements are similar, but the process, legal foundations, and terminology are different

Two starting points

2.All involvement of participants LCC requires the approval of an appropriate body Approval from a flagged REC operating within the National Research Ethics Service (NRES) is required Researchers should make arrangements with the NRES Central Allocation System (CAS) rather than through individual RECs University RECs are not appropriate bodies for approving research involving adults LCC NRES Committees that can approve research involving adults LCC: – NHS Mental Capacity Flagged Committees – National Social Care REC – 2 Ministry of Defence RECs (if remit extends to the proposed research)

Any questions thus far?