The Belmont Report

The Belmont Report clearly outlines the guidelines regarding ethical practices used for research studies. It was written by a group called the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, which was created as part of the National Research Act of 1974.

In the Belmont Report, the rules for ethical research practices are clearly outlined. It states that all people should be treated with respect, and as “autonomous agents,” and that “those with diminished autonomy are entitled to protection” (The Belmont Report). All researchers should be “protecting [the subjects] from harm,” following the Hippocratic oath, and treating their subjects justly (The Belmont Report). It also puts in place the rule that all subjects need to give “informed consent,” and that their consent must be voluntary (The Belmont Report). The report also opens up an opportunity for a review board by saying that the review board “is a method for determining whether the risks that will be presented to subjects are justified” (The Belmont Report). Both the review board and the researcher need to assess all the risks associated with the research study to ensure that all participants are being treated ethically. Review boards do a final stamp of approval to ensure that all methods of conducting the research will cause no long lasting damage to any participant. They may approve, disapprove, or require modifications to research as a means of protecting the participants. It is sometimes suggested by Institutional Review Boards that researchers commit to keeping “participants’ identities anonymous” in certain situations would protect them if they were to reveal “potentially damaging information” about themselves (Driscoll). In addition, they aim to eliminate any existing bias in the study, ensuring that the reported results paint an accurate picture of the data.

If institutional review boards did not exist, there would be no guarantee that the human participants of any research would be treated ethically. In the days before review boards came to be, researchers believed that the ends justified the means, making it possible for them to subject human participants to unethical and potentially damaging research. Margaret Moon published an article in the AMA Journal of ethics with numerous examples of this, including “the Willowbrook study of hepatitis transmission in a hospital for mentally impaired children,” and the “Fernald State School trials using radioactive minerals in impaired children” (Moon). These are both instances in which participants were taken advantage of and exposed to unethical treatment.

The Belmont Report and Institutional Review Boards both ensure the safety of research participants. Without them, participants might suffer long lasting damage at the hands of researchers, and researchers might produce inaccurate studies as a result of their own unchecked bias. These are both important to maintaining ethical practices in research.