Skip header and navigation

1 records – page 1 of 1.

Biomedical surveillance: rights conflict with rights.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature236478
Source
J Occup Med. 1986 Oct;28(10):958-65
Publication Type
Article
Date
Oct-1986
Author
G. Atherley
N. Johnston
M. Tennassee
Source
J Occup Med. 1986 Oct;28(10):958-65
Date
Oct-1986
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Aviation
Biomedical research
Canada
Civil Rights - legislation & jurisprudence
Disclosure
Ethics
Government Regulation
Humans
Lead
Mandatory Programs
Mass Screening - legislation & jurisprudence
Mining
Monitoring, Physiologic
Occupational Diseases - prevention & control
Occupational Health Services - legislation & jurisprudence
Research Subjects
Risk assessment
Uranium
Abstract
Medical screening and biomedical monitoring violate individual rights. Such conflicts of right with right are acted upon synergistically by uncertainty which, in some important respects, increases rather than decreases as a result of research. Issues of rightness and wrongness, ethical issues, arise because the human beings who are subjects of medical screening and biological monitoring often have little or no option whether to be subjected to them. We identify issues of rightness and wrongness of biomedical surveillance for various purposes of occupational health and safety. We distinguish between social validity and scientific validity. We observe that principles are well established for scientific validity, but not for social validity. We support guidelines as a way forward.
PubMed ID
3772552 View in PubMed
Less detail