American Journal of Bioethics.

A Proposed Process for Reliably Updating the Common Rule

The recent Common Rule revision process took almost a decade and the resulting changes are fairly modest, particularly when compared to the ambitious ideas proposed in the advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) and notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). Furthermore, the revision process did not even attempt to tackle any of the Common Rule subparts pertaining to vulnerable populations (i.e., pregnant women and fetuses, prisoners, children) where commentators think the rules unduly restrict important research. We believe that this was a missed opportunity to make desirable changes, and that given the usual process the next opportunity to revisit the Common Rule is unacceptably remote. In this article, we argue that the Common Rule should be regularly reassessed, with a mechanism for making substantive (and expeditious) changes. Drawing on lessons learned from the recent revision process, we make recommendations about ways to structure future attempts to maximize the ability to make timely and necessary changes.

View Full Text

Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.

Volume 17, Issue 7
July 2017

Target Articles.

A Proposed Process for Reliably Updating the Common Rule Benjamin E. Berkman, David Wendler, Haley K. Sullivan & Christine Grady
Rethinking the Belmont Report? Phoebe Friesen, Lisa Kearns, Barbara Redman & Arthur L. Caplan

Editorial.

Modernizing Research Regulations Is Not Enough: It's Time to Think Outside the Regulatory Box Suzanne M. Rivera, Kyle B. Brothers, R. Jean Cadigan, Heather L. Harrell, Mark A. Rothstein, Richard R. Sharp & Aaron J. Goldenberg