Science and Engineering Ethics

, Volume 13, Issue 3, pp 315–332 | Cite as

The Admissibility of Research in Emergency Medicine

Original Paper

Abstract

The main goal in this paper is to present the legal rules connected with medical experiment on human beings in emergency medicine and to explain the scope, significance, and meaning of these rules, especially with regard to their interpretation. As the provisions about medical experiments truly make sense only if they can be observed by the whole “civilised” international community, they are presented in the context of international law with reference to Polish law. By considering the appropriate regulations of research contained in legal documents, it is possible to formulate a catalogue of doctors’ duties and patients’ rights. This general catalogue refers to all kinds of medical research involving human beings. In the field of emergency medicine, general provisions are sometimes involved, and they are sometimes limited. The main and most important conclusion is that a medical experiment in emergency medicine is admissible only if previously indicated conditions based on general rules of conducting research are fulfilled.

Keywords

Legal admissibility Medical experiments International law 

References

  1. 1.
    Naess, A. C., Foerde, R., & Steen, A. (2001). Patient autonomy in emergency medicine. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 4, 71–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Trial of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No.10 Nuremberg. October 1946–April 1949, Washington DC, USA Government Printing Office, 1949–1953.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cyprian, T., & Sawicki, J. (1948). Prawo norymberskie. Bilans i perspektywy. Warszawa-Kraków.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Glueck, S. (1946). The nuremberg trial and agression war. New York.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Convention for the protection of Human Rights and dignity of the human being with regard to the application of biology and medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine: http://www.conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Word/164.doc—19th May 2006.
  6. 6.
    Kornas, S. (1986). Współczesne eksperymenty medyczne w ocenie etyki katolickiej. Częstochowa, p. 12.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Giesen, D. (1988). International medical malpractice law (p. 43). London.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Levine, R. J. (1986). Ethics and regulation of clinical research (p. 3) Baltimore-Munich.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bernhardt, R. (Ed.) (2000). Encyclopedia of public international law (vol. IV, pp. 452–460). North-Holland.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bierzanek, R. (1988). Some remarks on Soft International Law. Polish Yearbook of International Law, 17, 21.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Boyle, A. E. (1999). Reflections on treaties and Soft law. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 48, 904–906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. United Nations Treaty Series (vol. 1155, p. 331); (1969). (vol. 8, 1617, p. 679).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Directive 2001/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administration provisions of the MS relating to the implementation of good clinical practice in the conduct of clinical trials on medicinal products for human use; Official Journal L 121, 01/05/2001: 0034–0044.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Barcz, J., & Michoński, A., (Eds.) (2003). Wybór dokumentów. Traktat Akcesyjny—Traktaty stanowiące podstawę Unii—Prawo polskie—dokumenty, Warszawa.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wnukiewicz-Kozłowska, A. (2005). Harmonisation of the Polish law with the EU directives in the field of biomedicine. Jurisprudencija, 72(64), 56.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Medical Profession Act of December 5, 1996. Journal of Laws No. 02.21.204.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pharmaceutical Law of September 6, 2001. Journal of Laws No. 01.126.1381.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    The Ordinance of the Minister of Health on the Central Registration of Clinical Trials of November 29, 2002. Journal of Laws No. 02.209.1783.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ordinance of the Minister of Health on Good Manufacturing Practice of December 3, 2002. Journal of Laws No. 02.224.1882.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ordinance of the Minister of Health on the manner and scope of conducting inspections with Good Clinical Practice of December 10, 2002. Journal of Laws No. 02.219.1844.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ordinance of the Minister of Health on detailed rules of Good Clinical Practice of December 10, 2002. Journal of Laws No. 02.221.1864.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ordinance of the Minister of Health and Social Welfare on detailed rules for the appointment and financing of bioethics committees of May 11, 1999. Journal of Laws No. 99.47.480.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Council of Europe, European Treaties (ETS No. 5) Rome, 4 November 1950, Text completed by Protocol No. 2 (ETS No. 44) of 6 May 1963 and amended by Protocol No. 3 (ETS No. 45) of 6 May 1963, Protocol No. 5 (ETS No. 55) of 20 January 1966 and Protocol No. 8 (ETS No. 118) of 19 March 1985.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966, entry into force 23 March 1976, in accordance with Art. 49.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966, entry into force 3 January 1976, in accordance with Art. 27.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union, proclaimed in Nice on 7 December 2000.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Frankowska, M. (1997). Prawo traktatów (p. 119). Warszawa.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Boratyńska, M., & Konieczniak, P. (2001). Prawa pacjenta (p. 115).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kubicki, L. (Ed.) (2003). Prawo medyczne (p. 35). Wroclaw.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Brock, D. W. (1987). Informed consent. In D. VanDeeVeer, & T. Regan (Eds.), Health care ethics. An Introduction (p. 110). Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Foëx, B. A. (2001). The problem of informed consent in emergency medicine research. Emergency Medicine Journal, 18, 198–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Richardson, L. D. (2005). The ethics of research without consent in emergency situations. The Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine, 72, 242–248.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kolasa, J. (2005). Ubezpieczenie badań klinicznych w Polsce. Advances in Clinical Experimental Medicine, 14(5), 1105–1108.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Cassese, A. (2005). International law (2nd ed., p. 150). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Brownlie, I. (2003). Principles of public international law (6th ed., pp. 529–557). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Jasudowicz, T. (1999). Granice korzystania z praw człowieka—rozwiązania Konstytucji RP na tle standardów europejskich. In C. Mik (Ed.), Konstytucja Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej z 1997 roku a członkostwo Polski w Unii Europejskiej (p. 45). Toruń.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Marek, A. (2005). Kodeks karny. Komentarz (2nd ed.). Warszawa.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Buchała, K., & Zoll, A. (1998). Kodeks karny. Część ogólna. Komentarz (vol. I).Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Spotowski, A. (1990). Stan wyższej konieczności a kontratyp dozwolonego ryzyka. Państwo i Prawo, 67.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chair of Public International and European Law, Faculty of Law, Administration and EconomyWroclaw UniversityWroclawPoland

Personalised recommendations