Nuremberg Code

related topics
{theory, work, human}
{law, state, case}
{disease, patient, cell}
{war, force, army}

The Nuremberg Code is a set of research ethics principles for human experimentation set as a result of the Subsequent Nuremberg Trials at the end of the Second World War.

Contents

Background

On August 19, 1947, the judges delivered their verdict in the "Doctors' Trial" against Karl Brandt and several others. They also delivered their opinion on medical experimentation on human beings. Several of the accused had argued that their experiments differed little from pre-war ones and that there was no law that differentiated between legal and illegal experiments.

In April of the same year, Dr. Leo Alexander had submitted to the Counsel for War Crimes six points defining legitimate medical research. The trial verdict adopted these points and added an extra four. The ten points constituted the "Nuremberg Code". Although the legal force of the document was not established and it was not incorporated directly into either the American or German law, the Nuremberg Code and the related[1] Declaration of Helsinki are the basis for the Code of Federal Regulations Title 45 Volume 46 [3], which are the regulations issued by the United States Department of Health and Human Services governing federally funded research in the United States. In addition, the Nuremberg code has also been incorporated into the law of individual states such as California, and other countries[citation needed].

The Nuremberg code includes such principles as informed consent and absence of coercion; properly formulated scientific experimentation; and beneficence towards experiment participants.

The ten points of the Nuremberg Code

The ten points are, (all from United States National Institutes of Health) [2]

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him/her to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonable to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.

Full article ▸

related documents
Ignoratio elenchi
Special pleading
Wikipedia:Decision Making Process
Denying the antecedent
Godwin's law
Security engineering
Distributive justice
Accident
Monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force
Insanity
The Machinery of Freedom
Hanlon's razor
Thoughtcrime
Process theology
Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot
Adage
Christoph Gottfried Bardili
Term logic/Danielsavoiu's summary
Collective unconscious
William Schutz
Chaos argument
Bahya ibn Paquda
Dominator culture
Orgel's rule
Institutional Mode of Representation
Weimar culture
Absurdist fiction
Painting style
Ki Society
Procedural memory