Is it Ethical to Do Scientific Testing on Minors?

[Barnette ⋆˙⟡ (my girlfriend's version), Creator, Head Moderator]

Thanks for the suggestion, Hazel!

[Hazel (my girlfriend's version)]

Seeing as minors can't legally consent to being part of scientific studies, is it really ethical?
Most of the studies i've looked at, you have to above 16 to be a part of, which seems fair to me.

[gia]

100 percent agree

[Sai :), Assistant Moderator]

agreed!
also minors shouldn't be engaging in anything potentially life-altering, like they're still young we don't always make the best decisions and honestly your life won't end if you can't participate in a study

[★ sᴛᴀʀ ★ᴡᴇʟᴄᴏᴍᴇ ᴛᴏ ᴍʏ ᴜɴᴅᴇʀᴡᴏʀʟᴅ]

I lowkey thought this topic was saying is it ethical to do TESTING on MINORS- I was gonna freak out 😭

I'm assuming yall are talking about studies 👍

[Sai :), Assistant Moderator]

😭😭 I'm pretty sure we're talking about consensual testing 😭 otherwise, that's just messed up on a whole different level

[Rowan]

✶ Star ✶ (Angel dust~) wrote: "I lowkey thought this topic was saying is it ethical to do TESTING on MINORS- I was gonna freak out 😭

I'm assuming yall are talking about studies 👍"


ME TOOO, I literally was about to come give my spiel about how this isn't an argument it's torture, but, now that i realize. STILL NOOOOO, their brains aren't developed yet

[gia]

they legally cannot consent to this, so no

[Nima]

I think as long as they have written and informed consent from both the minor and a legal parent/guardian (bc minors can't legally consent), it would be considered ethical by Institutional Review Board standards.

[Sai :), Assistant Moderator]

i guess, but also how can a guardian give consent for their kid? i get it but also i don't, the minor should be able to directly make their own decisions and if they aren't old enough too, then they should just be not allowed until theyre 18

[Barnette ⋆˙⟡ (my girlfriend's version), Creator, Head Moderator]

What if the test is specifically about children and how a certain medication reacts with children or how their brain functions in a certain situation or something like that? (not really directed at anyone, just a prompt)

[kitcantspell]

i feel like there are a lot of different variables here, like whatre they testing for? will they be undergoing some sort of medication for it? how old are they?

bc i feel like there are some types of testing that can be good for someone and help them, making it ethical, but then it can be negative and immediately make it unethical

[gia]

i mean itshouldnt be completely up to the parents even in that case, the child shoukd have a say. on the other hand, minors cant legally consent for a good reason

[Hazel (my girlfriend's version)]

What about non-invasive tests, like brain scans, for research purposes?

[Hazel (my girlfriend's version)]

bibliophile [semi ia] wrote: "Is that what we mean by scientific testing? I thought we’re discussing drug trials"

I meant scientific research, i didnt realise barnette put the title as testing lol. But yeah, any kind if research which can range from brain scans and blood tests to drug trials

[Barnette ⋆˙⟡ (my girlfriend's version), Creator, Head Moderator]

Hazel wrote: "bibliophile [semi ia] wrote: "Is that what we mean by scientific testing? I thought we’re discussing drug trials"

I meant scientific research, i didnt realise barnette put the title as testing lol..."

I can change the title if needed

[Hazel (my girlfriend's version)]

Barnette ⋆˙⟡ {single pringle version} wrote: "Hazel wrote: "bibliophile [semi ia] wrote: "Is that what we mean by scientific testing? I thought we’re discussing drug trials"

Its okayy dw
I meant scientific research, i didnt realise barnette put the title ..."

[Hazel (my girlfriend's version)]

bibliophile [semi ia] wrote: "I think non invasive scientific testing is a completely different discussion
But even the radiation from an x ray cld be unsafe. It’s radiation after all.
(Not that I’m a big believer in coddling..."

Yeah agreed

[Barnette ⋆˙⟡ (my girlfriend's version), Creator, Head Moderator]

Oki

[Hazel (my girlfriend's version)]

Theough if someone us trialing a drug that treats illnesses iñ children, the drig would need to be tested on a small group of children..

[Ava ୨ৎ]

Hazel wrote: "What about non-invasive tests, like brain scans, for research purposes?"

Ofc you should be allowed to do brain scans on minors that’s necessary for a lot of health stuff and brain injuries 😭 ik it’s for research purposes which is different, but I’d say if they’re over 13 and them and their parents agree then why not? With invasive testing and drug trials it’s very different though

[Khadijah *:･ﾟ✧*:･ﾟ✧]

No it isn't.

[Achelois (Ash)]

i will say i just did a research project where we specifically were looking at how ai therapy effected teens and there were like no studies. the best ones i found were with college students

but i feel like if they consent, their parents consent, and they're over like 13 or smth they should be good.

[⋆✧Maddie ✧⋆]

I honestly don't know what to say here. I would say that it would technically not be considered ethical to do scientific testing on minors simply because they are under the age of legal consent. No matter how informed they were of everything that went on in the study their consent would technically not matter because legally it would be null. While it might not be ethical the parents could chose for them which could be a good or bad thing. I mean if your parent could choose for you it could be good if you want into the trial. What if you don't though? That's another area that I see questionable because technically a minor couldn't say no to their parents wishes and have it legally be considered, I see this part as unethical.

On a side note, animals can't consent...
They just get tested on whenever the scientist wants to without having a say...

[maya ۶ৎ⋆.]

i really feel that it's unethical to perform scientific experiments on minors. for one, kids and teens often don’t fully grasp what they’re getting into. the american psychological association points out that they may not have the maturity to make informed decisions about participating in research (apa, 2017).

also, minors can be super vulnerable to pressure from adults, which makes it tricky. the belmont report highlights this issue and emphasizes that we should protect those who are more at risk (national commission, 1979).

plus, we really should prioritize their safety. the principle of beneficence is all about avoiding harm and maximizing benefits, and with minors, the long-term effects of experiments can be really unpredictable (beauchamp & childress, 2013).

i think we need to prioritize protecting minors' well-being. the potential risks just don’t seem worth it when it comes to experimenting on them.

[Sai :), Assistant Moderator]

now that i'm reading all of your guys's comments, i feel really torn. on one hand we should never ever expose a kid to something that could negatively affect them for life, but also sometimes you really need to test on minors if you want to improve certain things or whatever.