ABSTRACT
In this chapter, the author discusses the five implications for the future role of Research Ethics Committees in ethical review of paediatric research. The first claim is that a common interpretation of the Declaration of Helsinki is that children should not be involved in non-therapeutic research. His second claim is that the concept of ‘minimal risk’ that is applied in therapeutic research involving children is too narrow. The third and most controversial claim is that the protection of children’s rights to participate in medical research may not be the only need present day. The first implication relates to the author's claim about children’s social obligation to participate in medical research. A second implication related to the social obligation argument as well as to his first two claims, is that ‘Ethical Review Committees should not only consider it an “advantage”’, but an ethical obligation to include – as consultants – patients of vulnerable groups.
