The increasing danger of legal entanglement for researchers who disregard the rights of human subjects used in research, in particular their right of privacy, is examined. The broad definition of a human subject and the equally broad definition of injury are discussed. The implications of the Privacy Act of 1974 are noted, and the critical need for a researcher-privilege statute set forth.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlexanderL.Protection of privacy in behavioral researchLex et Scientia, 1967, 4, 34–47
2.
CampbellD. T.BoruchR. F.SchwartzR. D.SteinbergJ.Confidentiality-preserving modes of access to files and to interfile exchange for useful statistical analysis. In National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council, Protecting individual privacy in evaluation research.Washington, D. C.: Author, 1975.
3.
CurranW. J.LaskaE. M.KaplanH.BankR.Protection of privacy and confidentialityScience, 1973, 182.797–802
4.
Georgetown University Law School. Researcher-subject relationship: The need for protection and a model statuteGeorgetown Law Journal, 1973, 62, 243–272
5.
Harvard University Law School. Rights of the public and the press to gather informationHarvard Law Review, 1974, 57, 1505–1533
6.
McNamaraR. M.StarrJ. R.Confidentiality of narcotic addict treatment records: A legal and statistical analysisColumbia Law Review, 1973, 73, 1579–1612
7.
National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council. Protecting individual privacy in evaluation research.Washington, D. C.: Author, 1975.
8.
NejelskiP.FinterbuschK.Prosecutor and the researcher: Present and prospective variations on the Supreme Court's Branzburg decisionSocial Problems, 1973, 21, 3–21
9.
NejelskiP.LermanL.Researcher-subject testimonial privilege: What to do before the subpoena arrivesWisconsin Law Review, 1971, 1971, 1085–1148
10.
ReynoldsP. D.On the protection of human subjects and social scienceInternational Social Science Journal, 1972, 24, 693–719
11.
RuebhausenO. M.BrimO. G.Privacy and behavioral researchColumbia Law Review, 1965, 65, 1184–1211
12.
SchroeterG.Protection of confidentiality in the courtsSocial Problems, 1969, 16, 376–385
13.
U. S. Office of Science and Technology. Privacy and behavioral research.Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967.
14.
Valparaiso University Law School. Social research and privileged dataValparaiso University Law Review, 1970, 4,368–400
