z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Protecting Soldiers from Friendly Fire: The Consent Requirement for Using Investigational Drugs and Vaccines in Combat
Author(s) -
George J. Annas
Publication year - 1998
Publication title -
american journal of law and medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.312
H-Index - 28
eISSN - 2375-835X
pISSN - 0098-8588
DOI - 10.1017/s009885880001042x
Subject(s) - courage , waiver , moral courage , law , dignity , conscience , political science , psychology
This could be the world's largest friendly fire incident. In his classic treatise On War, Karl von Clausewitz emphasizes that courage is the “first quality of a warrior.” He defines two types of courage: “courage in the presence of danger to the person; next, moral courage, or courage in the presence of responsibility, whether before the judgment seat of an external authority or before that of the internal authority of conscience.“ Both were involved in the U.S. military's decision to seek a waiver of informed consent requirements for the use of investigational drugs and vaccines on U.S. troops in the Persian Gulf War. The danger of chemical and biological attack was seen as demanding this waiver; while the Nuremberg Code, medical ethics, and respect for the human rights and dignity of American soldiers cautioned against it. The legal maneuvering to revise consent regulations for wartime conditions provides a case study illustrating how the boundary line between therapy and experimentation can become hopelessly blurred, the differences between law and ethics, and the ethical obligations of military physicians.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom