Conscription to Biobank Research?

  • Søren Holm
  • Bjørn Hofmann
  • Jan Helge Solbakk


There are certain social activities that are conceived as so necessary and important that we legally oblige people to participate in them. Most societies have at some point in time had general conscription of male adult citizens into the armed forces; some societies require people to serve on juries and some have compulsory immunizations. Finally, in most societies, taxation exists as a kind of socially accepted, although at the same time often disliked, kind of compulsion. In this chapter the analogies of conscription and taxation are pursued to see to what extent participation in biobank research could be perceived as so important that some kind of conscription for research would be justifiable.


Biomedical Research Moral Obligation Free Rider Liberal Society Conscientious Objection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ashcroft RE (2005) Access to essential medicines: A Hobbesian social contract approach. Developing World Bioethics 5:121–141PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brassington I (2007) John Harris’ argument for a duty to research. Bioethics 21:160–168PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chan S, Harris J (2008) Free riders and pious sons – Why science research remains obligatory. Bioethics doi: 10.1111/j.1467–8519.2008.00648.xGoogle Scholar
  4. Erin CA, Harris J (1993) Aids: Ethics, justice, and social policy. Journal of Applied Philosophy 10:165–173PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Evans HM (2004) Should patients be allowed to veto their participation in clinical research? Journal of Medical Ethics 30:198–203PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Evans HM (2007) Do patients have duties? Journal of Medical Ethics 33:689–694PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Harris J (2005) Scientific research is a moral duty. Journal of Medical Ethics 31:242–248PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hofmann B et al. (2006a) Teaching old dogs new tricks: The role of analogies in bioethical analysis and argumentation concerning new technologies. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27:397–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hofmann B et al. (2006b) Analogical reasoning in handling emerging technologies: The case of umbilical cord blood biobanking. The American Journal of Bioethics 6:49–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Holm S (1999) Is society responsible for my health? In: Bennett R, Erin CA (Eds.) HIV and AIDS testing, screening, and confidentiality. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 125–139Google Scholar
  11. Jonas H (1972) Philosophical reflections on experimenting with human subjects. In: Freund PA (Ed.) Experimentation with human subjects. Allen and Unwin, London, pp 1–31Google Scholar
  12. Shapshay S, Pimple KD (2007) Participation in biomedical research is an imperfect moral duty: A response to John Harris. Journal of Medical Ethics 33: 414–417PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Søren Holm
    • 1
  • Bjørn Hofmann
  • Jan Helge Solbakk
  1. 1.Cardiff Centre for EthicsCardiff UniversityCardiffUK

Personalised recommendations