Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Respect for Human Vulnerability: The Emergence of a New Principle in Bioethics

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Vulnerability has become a popular though controversial topic in bioethics, notably since 2000. As a result, a common body of knowledge has emerged (1) distinguishing between different types of vulnerability, (2) criticizing the categorization of populations as vulnerable, and (3) questioning the practical implications. It is argued that two perspectives on vulnerability, i.e., the philosophical and political, pose challenges to contemporary bioethics discourse: they re-examine the significance of human agency, the primacy of the individual person, and the negativity of vulnerability. As a phenomenon of globalization, vulnerability can only be properly addressed in a global bioethics that takes the social dimension of human existence seriously.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See, for example: vulnerability versus susceptibility (Kottow 2003); intrinsic versus contingent (Silvers 2004); broad versus restrictive (Hurst 2008); primary versus secondary vulnerability (Schramm and Braz 2008); internal versus external (Schroeder and Gefenas 2009); being vulnerable versus making vulnerable (Luna 2009); alterable versus unalterable (Solbakk 2011); general versus special vulnerability (IBC 2011).

  2. In a later publication, Thomasma (2000) qualifies this point of view by distinguishing between the special vulnerability of the sick and the general vulnerability of all human beings. Human existence is finite and thus essentially vulnerable, but disease or old age can create additional vulnerabilities.

References

  • Aldwin, C., and T. Revenson. 1986. Vulnerability to economic stress. American Journal of Community Psychology 4(2): 161–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ankrah, E.M. 1991. AIDS and the social side of health. Social Science & Medicine 32(9): 967–980.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Anonymous. 1980. The hospital industry’s new vulnerability to antitrust. Regulation 4(5): 12–13.

  • Beauchamp, T., and J. Childress. 2012. Principles of biomedical ethics, 7th ed. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Belmont Report. 1979. Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research, Report of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Federal Register 44(76): 23191–23197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benaroyo, L. 2007. The notion of vulnerability in the philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas and its significance for medical ethics and aesthetics. http://www.api.or.at/aebm/download/docs/web_levinas.pdf.

  • Blacksher, E., and J. Stone. 2002. Introduction to “vulnerability” issues. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 23(6): 421–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Botbol-Baum, M. 2000. The necessary articulation of autonomy and vulnerability. In Basic ethical principles in European bioethics and biolaw: Vol. II: Partners’ research, edited by J. D. Rendtorff, and P. Kemp, 57–64. Copenhagen and Barcelona: Centre for Ethics and Law and Institut Borja de Bioetica.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, N. 1994. Climate change and human history: Some indications from Europe, AD 400–1400. Environmental Pollution 83(1–2): 37–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burggraeve, R. 1999. Violence and the vulnerable face of the other: The vision of Emmanuel Levinas on moral evil and our responsibility. Journal of Social Philosophy 30(1): 29–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callahan, D. 2000. The vulnerability of the human condition. In Bioethics and biolaw: Vol. II: Four ethical principles, edited by P. Kemp, J. Rendtorff, and N. Mattson Johansen, 115–122. Copenhagen: Rhodos International Science and Art Publishers & Centre for Ethics and Law.

    Google Scholar 

  • CIOMS. 1982. Proposed international guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects. In Bioethics: Issues and perspectives, edited by S. Scholle Connor, and H.L. Fuenzalida-Puelma, 220–226. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • CIOMS. 1991. International guidelines for ethical review of epidemiological studies. http://www.cioms.ch/publications/guidelines/1991_texts_of_guidelines.htm. Accessed September 14, 2012.

  • CIOMS. 1993. International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects. http://www.codex.uu.se/texts/international.html. Accessed September 14, 2012.

  • CIOMS. 2002. International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects. http://www.cioms.ch/publications/guidelines/guidelines_nov_2002_blurb.htm. Accessed September 14, 2012.

  • Coleman, C.H. 2009. Vulnerability as a regulatory category in human subject research. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 37(1): 12–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, R.W. 2002. The political economy of a plural world: Critical reflections on power, morals and civilization. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cutler, S. 1979. Safety on the streets: Cohort changes in fear. International Journal of Aging and Human Development 10(4): 373–384.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Danis, M., and D. Patrick. 2002. Health policy, vulnerability, and vulnerable populations. In Ethical dimensions of health policy, edited by M. Danis, C. Clancy, and L. Churchill, 310–334. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • DeBruin, D. 2001. Reflections on “vulnerability.” Bioethics Examiner 5(2): 1, 4, 7.

  • Delor, F., and M. Hubert. 2000. Revisiting the concept of “vulnerability.” Social Science & Medicine 50(11): 1557–1570.

  • Derrida, J. 2002. The animal that therefore I am (more to follow). Critical Inquiry 28(2): 369–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eckenwiler, L., C. Ellis, D. Feinholz, and T. Schonfeld. 2008. Hopes for Helsinki: Reconsidering “vulnerability.” Journal of Medical Ethics 34(10): 765–766.

  • Epstein, P.R. 1994. Framework for an integrated assessment of health, climate change, and ecosystem vulnerability. Annals New York Academy of Sciences 740(1): 423–435.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fillenbaum, G.G. 1976. An examination of the vulnerability hypothesis. International Journal of Aging & Human Development 8(2): 155–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flanigan, R. 2000. Vulnerability and the bioethics movement. Bioethics Forum 16(2): 13–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flaskerud, J., and B. Winslow. 1998. Conceptualizing vulnerable populations health-related research. Nursing Research 47(2): 69–78.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Forster, H.P., E. Emanuel, and C. Grady. 2001. The 2000 revision of the Declaration of Helsinki: A step forward or more confusion? The Lancet 358(9291): 1449–1453.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, K. 2002. Hotep’s story: Exploring the wounds of health vulnerability in the US. Theoretical Medicine 23(6): 471–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gehlen, A. 1988. Man: His nature and place in the world. New York: Columbia University Press. Originally published as Der Mensch, seine Natur und seine Stellung in der Welt (Berlin: Junker und Dünnhaupt, 1940).

  • Goodin, R.E. 1985. Protecting the vulnerable: A reanalysis of our social responsibilities. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

  • Gutlove, P., and G. Thompson. 2003. Human security: Expanding the scope of public health. Medicine, Conflict & Survival 19(1): 17–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, P. 2008. Corporeal remains: Vulnerability, proximity, and living on after the end of the world. Environment and Planning 40(2): 423–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmaster, B. 2006. What does vulnerability mean? The Hastings Center Report 36(2): 38–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, C. 1998. The primacy of ethics: Hobbes and Levinas. Continental Philosophy Review 31(1): 79–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurst, S. 2008. Vulnerability in research and health care: Describing the elephant in the room? Bioethics 22(4): 191–202.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • IBC (International Bioethics Committee). 2011. Report of the IBC on the principle of respect for human vulnerability and personal integrity. Paris: UNESCO, SHS/EST/CIB-17/10/CONF.501/2 Rev 2. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001895/189591e.pdf.

  • Iltis, A.S. 2009. Introduction: Vulnerability in biomedical research. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 37(1): 6–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaggar, A.M. 2002. Vulnerable women and neo-liberal globalization: Debt burdens undermine women’s health in the global South. Theoretical Medicine 23(6): 425–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jotkowitz, A. 2004. Vulnerability from a global medicine perspective. The American Journal of Bioethics 4(3): 62–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Justo, L. 2004. Participatory research: A way to reduce vulnerability. The American Journal of Bioethics 4(3): 67–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, K., and J.H. Bryant. 1994. The vulnerable in developed and developing countries—a conceptual approach. In Poverty, vulnerability, the value of human life, and the emergence of bioethics, edited by Z. Bankowski, and J.H. Bryant, 57–63. Geneva: CIOMS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, A.S., D.L. Swerdlow, and D.D. Juranek. 2001. Precautions against biological and chemical terrorism directed at food and water supplies. Public Health Reports 116(1): 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kipnis, K. 2001. Vulnerability in research subjects: A bioethical taxonomy. In Ethical and policy issues in research involving human research participants, edited by the National Bioethics Advisory Commission, G1–G13. Bethesda, MD: National Bioethics Advisory Commission.

  • Kipnis, K. 2003. Seven vulnerabilities in the pediatric research subject. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 24(2): 107–120.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kipnis, K. 2004. The limitations of “limitations.” The American Journal of Bioethics 4(3): 70–72.

  • Kirby, P. 2006. Vulnerability and violence: The impact of globalisation. London and Ann Arbor, MI: Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirby, P. 2010. Vulnerability and globalization: The social impact of vulnerability. In Handbook of globalization studies, edited by B. Turner, 113–134. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kottow, M.H. 2003. The vulnerable and the susceptible. Bioethics 17(5–6): 460–471.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kottow, M.H. 2004. Vulnerability: What kind of principle is it? Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 7(3): 281–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinas, E. 2009. Otherwise than being or beyond essence. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press. Originally published as Autrement qu’ȇtre ou Au-delà de l’essence (La Haye: Martinus Nijhoff, 1974).

  • Levine, R.J. 1981. Ethics and regulation of clinical research. Baltimore and Munich: Urban & Schwarzenberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, R.J., and K. Lebacqz. 1979. Some ethical considerations in clinical trials. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 25(5/2): 728–741.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Levine, C., R. Faden, C. Grady, D. Hammerschmidt, L. Eckenwiler, and J. Sugarman. 2004. The limitations of “vulnerability” as a protection for human research participants. The American Journal of Bioethics 4(3): 44–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J. 1990. The vulnerability of small-island states to sea level rise: The need for holistic strategies. Disasters 14(3): 241–249.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luna, F. 2006. Bioethics and vulnerability: A Latin American view. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luna, F. 2009. Elucidating the concept of vulnerability: Layers not labels. The International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 2(1): 121–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, C., W. Rogers, and S. Dodds, eds. 2014. Vulnerability: New essays in ethics and feminist philosophy. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macklin, R. 2003. Bioethics, vulnerability and protection. Bioethics 17(5–6): 472–486.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, A.K., N. Tavaglione, and S. Hurst. 2014. Resolving the conflict: Clarifying “vulnerability” in health care ethics. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 24(1): 51–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McGilloway, F.A. 1976. Dependency and vulnerability in the nurse/patient situation. Journal of Advanced Nursing 1(3): 229–236.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Morawa, A. 2003. Vulnerability as a concept in international human rights law. Journal of International Relations and Development 6(2): 139–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morin, E. 2005. Introduction à la pensée complexe. Paris: Points.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC). 2001. Ethical and policy issues in research involving human participants: Vol. 1: Reports and recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Bethesda, MD: National Bioethics Advisory Commission.

  • Nortvedt, P. 2003. Subjectivity and vulnerability: Reflections on the foundation of ethical sensibility. Nursing Philosophy 4(3): 222–230.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, O. 1996. Towards justice and virtue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Patrão Neves, M. 2009. Article 8: Respect for human vulnerability and personal integrity. In The UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights: Background, principles and application, edited by H. ten Have and M.S. Jean, 155–164. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrino, E.D., and D.C. Thomasma. 1981. A philosophical basis of medical practice: Toward a philosophy and ethic of the healing professions. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsay, L.E., M.J. Tidd, J.K. Butler, and G.R. Venning. 1977. Ethical review in the pharmaceutical industry. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 4(1): 73–76.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reich, W. 2005. The power of a single idea. In Bioetica ou bioeticas na evolução das sociedades, edited by M. Patrão Neves and M. Lima, 380–382. Coimbra: Grafica de Coimbra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rendtorff, J.D. 2002. Basic ethical principles in European bioethics and biolaw: Autonomy, dignity, integrity and vulnerability—towards a foundation of bioethics and biolaw. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 5(3): 235–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resnik, D.B. 2004. Research subjects in developing nations and vulnerability. The American Journal of Bioethics 4(3): 63–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ricoeur, P. 2007. Reflections on the just. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Originally published as Le juste, I (Paris: Esprit, 2001).

  • Ruof, M.C. 2004. Vulnerability, vulnerable populations, and policy. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14(4): 411–425.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scholte, J.A. 2000. Globalization: A critical introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schramm, F., and M. Braz. 2008. Bioethics of protection: A proposal for the moral problems of developing countries? Journal International de Bioéthique 19(1–2): 73–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder, D., and E. Gefenas. 2009. Vulnerability: Too vague and too broad? Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 18(2): 113–121.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sebastian, J.G. 1985. Homelessness: A state of vulnerability. Family & Community Health 8(3): 11–24.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shainess, N. 1979. Vulnerability to violence: Masochism as process. American Journal of Psychotherapy 33(2): 174–189.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shivas, T. 2004. Contextualizing the vulnerability standard. The American Journal of Bioethics 4(3): 84–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Silvers, A. 2004. Historical vulnerability and special scrutiny: Precautions against discrimination in medical research. The American Journal of Bioethics 4(3): 56–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Snarr, D., N. Brown, and E. Leonard. 1979. Permanent post-disaster housing in Honduras: Aspects of vulnerability to future disasters. Disasters 3(3): 287–292.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Solbakk, J. H. 2011. Vulnerability: A futile or useful principle in healthcare ethics? In The SAGE handbook of health care ethics: Core and emerging issues, edited by R. Chadwick, H. ten Have, and E.M. Meslin, 228–238. London: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Solbakk, J.H., and S. Vidal. 2012. Research ethics, clinical. In Encyclopedia of applied ethics, 2nd ed., vol. 3, edited by R. Chadwick, 775–785. San Diego: Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Steady, F.C. 1982. African women, industrialization and another development: A global perspective. Development Dialogue 1–2: 51–64.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, J. 2002. Race and healthcare disparities: Overcoming vulnerability. Theoretical Medicine 23(6): 499–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, C. 1985. Human agency and language: Philosophical papers I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ten Have, H. 2012. Potter’s notion of bioethics. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 22(1): 59–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • ten Have, H. 2014. The principle of vulnerability in the UNESCO Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. In The principle of human vulnerability in bioethics: Religious perspectives, edited by J. Tham, G. Miranda, and A. Garcia, 15–28. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomasma, D.C. 2000. The vulnerability of the sick. Bioethics Forum 16(2): 5–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. 2003. Report on the world social situation: Social vulnerability: Sources and challenges. New York: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Development Program (UNDP). 1999. Human development report 1999. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 2005. Universal declaration on bioethics and human rights. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001461/146180e.pdf. Accessed September 14, 2012.

  • Vörösmarty, C.J., P. Green, J. Salisbury, and R.B. Lammers. 2000. Global water resources: Vulnerability from climate change and population growth. Science 289(5477): 284–288.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Watts, M.J., and H.G. Bohle. 1993. The space of vulnerability: The causal structure of hunger and famine. Progress in Human Geography 17(1): 43–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weijer, C. 1999. Research involving the vulnerable sick. Accountability in Research 7(1): 21–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Whelan, D. 1998. Human rights approaches to an expanded response to address women’s vulnerability to HIV/AIDS. Health and Human Rights 3(1): 20–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • WMA (World Medical Association). 2000. Declaration of Helsinki, 5th revision. http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/helsinki.html. Accessed September 14, 2012.

  • WMA (World Medical Association). 2008. Declaration of Helsinki, 6th revision. http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/index.html.pdf?print-media-type&footer-right=[page]/[toPage]. Accessed September 14, 2012.

  • Zaidi, A. 1988. Poverty and disease: Need for structural change. Social Science & Medicine 27(2): 119–127.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zion, D., L. Gillam, and B. Loff, 2000. The Declaration of Helsinki, CIOMS and the ethics of research on vulnerable populations. Nature Medicine 6(6): 615–617.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Healthcare Ethics, Duquesne University, Fisher Hall 330, 600 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA, 15282, USA

    Henk ten Have

Authors
  1. Henk ten Have
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Henk ten Have.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

ten Have, H. Respect for Human Vulnerability: The Emergence of a New Principle in Bioethics. Bioethical Inquiry 12, 395–408 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-015-9641-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-015-9641-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation