Should Protections for Research With Humans Who Cannot Consent Apply to Research With Nonhuman Primates?
This paper considers how and why current protections for research with humans who cannot consent (such as children and those with severe dementia) can apply to nonhuman primates. Navigating the slippery and often contentious questions around moral significance of nonhuman animals, the author gives compelling examples of research projects where using nonhuman primates would be clearly unacceptable. These are then used as a baseline for determining a general principle that "individuals who are unable to consent should be enrolled in nonbeneficial research only when, at the very least, there is sufficient reason to believe that the potential benefits of the research justify the risks it poses." Though the author does not make claims around what might constitute justifiable benefits, he does offer interesting possibilities for how nonhuman primates can assent / dissent from particular research, even if they cannot officially "consent." READ MORE







