Debate Introduction:
With a current prison population of more than 2.4 million, this exponential growth has quadrupled since the 1980s and is indicative of a population that is more susceptible and vulnerable to potential abuse and harm. In 2001, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) sought to review the regulations for prisoners involved in research. They discovered that there was no repository of the types of research conducted including prisoners at that time (Gostin, Vanchieri, and Pope 59). The DHHS established a committee to assess the scope and content of research involving prisoners. Out of 48 states reviewed, reviewed, the committee discovered that 36 of them usually allowed social/behavioral studies research with minimal risk (Gostin, Vanchieri, and Pope 60). Due to changes in regulations in 1976, biomedical research that is non-therapeutic in nature is extremely rare in the prison context. Currently, there are debates in the medical community as to whether federal regulations should change to allow for greater avenues for prison research. Medical researchers are wondering if prisoners should be allowed to participate in non-therapeutic research and under what conditions could that occur. Some claim that the current categorical approach to research involving prisoners is actually not providing prisoners with enough protection (Gostin, Vanchieri, and Pope 60). With a category approach, it is strictly dependent on the four research categories permitted, as described in Subpart C, and does not consider factors like, the conditions of confinement, which may affect prisoners. Having a more individualized, case-by-case approach may not only provide greater research opportunities in prisons, but, most importantly greater protection for prisoners. |
|