The Nuremberg Doctors’ Trial
Looking Back 70 Years Later
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 12822342 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Xavier Aurey (University of Essex, autor de correspondencia) |
| Año | 2017 |
| Volumen | 17 |
| Número | 6 |
| Páginas | 1049-1069 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2017-11-23 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | No |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | International Criminal Law Review (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 1567-536X • E-ISSN: 1571-8123 |
| Editorial | Brill (PUBLISHER • NL) |
| DOI | 10.1163/15718123-01706004 |
| OpenAlex | W2768841849 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citas recibidas | 1 |
| Referencias citadas | 2 |
On 20 August 1947, the United States Military Tribunal condemned sixteen persons in Nuremberg for crimes committed in the name of science in several concentration camps. Moving away from a dichotomous stance delineating true science/false science, the judges were able to outline ten ethical and legal principles to regulate all clinical experiments, which were subsequently known as the Nuremberg Code. Where most of legal commentaries focus on the mere reading of these ten principles, this paper will highlight some of the steps in the legal journey of the American judges. We will see that, unfortunately, they failed to address one of the most difficult issues in clinical trials and human experimentation: the almost unavoidable context of exploitation of any situation where a person is used as an object for the good of others
Context (archaeology · International law · Nuremberg trials · Object (grammar · Political science · Reading (process · Sociology · Tribunal · War crime · Biomedical Ethics and Regulation · Ethics in Clinical Research · Ethics in medical practice · History · Law · Philosophy · Psychology
| Obras citantes distintas | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 0,17 |
| Intervalo de citas | 2020 - 2020 (1) |
| Velocidad de citación | historical |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 1 |