Image by Courtney Chrystal, J.D. candidate, Harvard Law School
In this episode of Proof Over Precedent, the fourth in a series on Ethics in the Law, host Jim Greiner talks again with IRB expert Shannon Sewards to discuss the complexities and criteria involved in obtaining waivers of informed consent within the realm of social science and legal research, comparing it to the regulations governing medical research. The two dive into an A2J Lab study on pretrial risk assessment tools to use as an example in determining the necessity of obtaining informed consent. When does protecting study participants take precedence, and when do critical research needs supersede those of participants?
Read the corresponding blog post.
Speakers:
Resources mentioned:
Related “Ethics in the Law” series episodes:
Share feedback and relevant topics you would like the A2J Lab to discuss: [email protected]
Stay connected with the Access to Justice Lab:
Proof Over Precedent cover art by Courtney Chrystal
Just because an individual may own property, does not guarantee that the person may keep that property—that’s the warning stemming from this week's podcast...
It helps to have a lawyer in court, no question. But in immigration court, where the vast majority of individuals are self-representing and not...
Image by Courtney Chrystal, J.D. candidate, Harvard Law School Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) watch over human subjects research to ensure ethical compliance. Ubiquitous in...
