Avoiding exploitation in phase i clinical trials: More than (un)just compensation

Matt Lamkin, Carl Elliott

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

9 Scopus citations


Lowering compensation to research subjects to protect them from “undue inducement” is a misguided attempt to shoehorn a concern about exploitation into the framework of autonomy. We suggest that oversight bodies should be less concerned about undue influence than about exploitation of subjects. Avoiding exploitation in human subjects research requires not only increasing compensation, but enhancing the dignity of research participation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)52-63
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Law, Medicine and Ethics
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 1 2018

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
We were invited to contribute a paper on themes addressed at the public conference, “The Future of Informed Consent in Research and Translational Medicine: A Century of Law, Ethics & Innovation,” which was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), and National Cancer Institute (NCI) grant R01HG008605 on “LawSeq: Building a Sound Legal Foundation for Translating Genomics into Clinical Application” (Susan M. Wolf, Ellen Wright Clayton, Frances Lawrenz, Principal Investigators).

Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 The Author(s).

PubMed: MeSH publication types

  • Journal Article
  • Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural


Dive into the research topics of 'Avoiding exploitation in phase i clinical trials: More than (un)just compensation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this