Abstract
Abstract:Research on zidovudine (AZT) for pregnant women in Africa sparked worldwide debate in the late 1990s. The debate ultimately led to the rewriting of international ethics guidelines, in at least one case specifically to prohibit use of a placebo group (the most controversial aspect of the research) when known effective treatment is available. I draw upon clinical experience in Malawi and theoretical perspectives from anthropology to reframe the controversy. The dominant bioethical position constructed research and therapy as ethically distinct. This distinction ensured that inequalities of power and resources were perpetuated, not remedied, by the AZT debates.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
