ETHICAL EXPERTISE OF BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH AS A WAY OF HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION.

Abstract

The aim: To find out the peculiarities of ethical expertise of biomedical research as a way of human rights protection. Materials and methods: The dialectical method of cognition, based on the epistemological possibilities of the laws and categories of dialectics, provided a study of the formation and activity of bodies and institutions responsible for the ethical examination of biomedical research. Formal and logical methods of analysis and synthesis made it possible to reveal the meaning of the concepts that make up the subject of the study, to carry out their classification, as well as to formulate intermediate and general conclusions. The systematic method made it possible to investigate the role and significance of biomedical human rights among other human and citizen rights and freedoms. Using the historical method, the main stages of the formation of biomedical research with human participation were determined. The structural-functional method made it possible to clarify the internal structure of the mechanism of constitutional and legal protection of the rights and freedoms of a person and citizen in the process of conducting biomedical research, as well as to determine the functional purpose of each of the elements of this mechanism. The content of legal regulations governing social relations, within which the organization and functioning of the human rights protection mechanism in the process of conducting biomedical research is carried out, was revealed with the help of a special legal method of cognition. The comparativist method made it possible to identify similar features and differences in the constitutional and legal regulation of the mechanism for the protection of human rights in the process of conducting biomedical research. Conclusions: Despite such a large number and variety of bioethics committees, it is worth noting that today it is not possible to state with certainty the existence of a full-fledged system of interconnected ethical committees, since the existing normative documents on their activities are of a temporary nature, and do not always clearly define the assigned their functions and tasks. In addition, there is an opinion that attempts to bureaucratize the existing situation (establish clear departmental subordination, define vertical and horizontal connections between ethics committees) are highly undesirable. Of course, on the one hand, excessive complication and bureaucratization will not contribute to progressive development in the activities of committees, and the system that has chaotically developed today is also not satisfactory.