On the Limits of Medical Experiment from the Perspective of Rational Choice Theory

Main Article Content

Wojciech Załuski


The rules of Polish law which formulate the conditions of permissibility of medical experiment, and thus determine its limits, can be interpreted in many different ways, especially in so far as they concern the required balance of potential costs and benefits of a planned experiment. However, in legal literature commenting on these rules one can hardly find a systematic and precise (to the degree which is possible in this area) account of these interpretations in the language of rational choice theory – the theory which is particularly helpful in such analysis due to its sophisticated conceptual apparatus for examining various configurations of costs and benefits. The present article is aimed to fill in this gap, providing this kind of account, and also attempting at an evaluation of the proposed interpretations. 


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Załuski, Wojciech. 2024. “On the Limits of Medical Experiment from the Perspective of Rational Choice Theory ”. Diametros, April, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.33392/diam.1936.
Author Biography

Wojciech Załuski, Katedra Filozofii Prawa i Etyki Prawniczej, Uniwersytet Jagielloński

professor, Faculty of Law and Adminsitration, Department of the Philosophy of Law and Legal Ethics, Jagiellonian Univeristy

Share |


Pozycje naukowe

Gałązka M. (2019), Prawnokarne granice nowatorskiej interwencji medycznej, Towarzystwo Naukowe KUL, Lublin.

King N.M.P., Churchill L.R. (2008), Assessing and Comparing Potential Benefits and Risk of Harm, [w:] The Oxford Textbook of Clinical Research Ethics, E.J. Emanuel et al. (red.), Oxford University Press, New York: 514–526.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195168655.003.0049

Kopelman L.M. (2004), Minimal Risk as an International Ethical Standard in Research, „Journal of Medicine and Philosophy” 29: 351–378.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03605310490500545

Rid A. (2014), Setting Risk Thresholds in Research: Lessons from the Debate About Minimal Risk, „Monash Bioethics Review” 32 (1): 63–85.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-014-0007-6

Rid A., Wendler D. (2010a), Risk-Benefit Assessment in Medical Research – Critical Review and Open Questions, „Law, Probability and Risk” 9: 151–177.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgq006

Rid A., Wendler, D. (2010b), Evaluating the Risks of Clinical Research, „Journal of the American Medical Association” 304 (13): 1472–1479.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2010.1414

Różyńska J. (2011), Standard minimalnego ryzyka, „Prawo i medycyna” 13 (2): 5–22.

Różyńska J. (2012), Ocena ryzyka i korzyści badania biomedycznego, [w:] Badania naukowe w biomedycynie z udziałem ludzi. Standardy międzynarodowe, J. Różyńska, M. Waligóra (red.), Wolters Kluwer, Warszawa: 65–85.

Simonsen S. (2012), Acceptable Risk in Biomedical Research. European Perspectives, Springer Science+Business Media B.V., Dordrecht–Heidelberg–London–New York.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2678-9

Teksty prawne

Rada Europy (2005), Protokół dodatkowy do konwencji o prawach człowieka i biomedycynie dotyczący badań biomedycznych, tłum. J. Różyńska, [w:] Badania naukowe z udziałem ludzi w biomedycynie. Standardy międzynarodowe, J. Różyńska, M. Waligóra (red.), Wolters Kluwer, Warszawa: 270–282.

Ustawa z dnia 5 grudnia 1996 r. o zawodach lekarza i lekarza dentysty (Dz.U. 1997 nr 28 poz. 152 z późn.zm)

Ustawa z dnia 6 czerwca 1997 r.– Kodeks karny (Dz. U. 1997 Nr 88, poz. 553 z późn.zm).