Against the Inalienable Right to Withdraw From Research

Abstract

In this paper I argue, against the current consensus, that the right to withdraw from research is sometimes alienable. In other words, research subjects are sometimes morally permitted to waive their right to withdraw. The argument proceeds in three major steps. In the first step, I argue that rights typically should be presumed alienable, both because that is not illegitimately coercive and because the general paternalistic motivation for keeping them inalienable is untenable. In the second step of the argument, I consider three special characteristics of the right to withdraw, first that its waiver might be exploitative, second that research involves intimate bodily access, and third that it is irreversible. I argue that none of these characteristics justify an inalienable right to withdraw. In the third step, I examine four considerations often taken to justify various other allegedly inalienable rights: concerns about treating yourself merely as a means as might be the case in suicide, concerns about revoking all your future freedoms in slavery contracts, the resolution of coordination problems, and public interest. I argue that the motivations involved in these four types of situations do not apply to the right to withdraw from research.

Withdrawing from Research: A Rethink in the Context of Research Biobanks

“…The reason we should sometimes allow this is that it respects our autonomy and allows us to make beneficial agreements, together with the important fact that the right to withdraw doesn't deserve special exemption to the general principle that rights are typically alienable (Chwang [2], p. 378).…”

“…Thus, without a guarantee that subjects will not withdraw, the researcher will not be able to perform the study. In such a situation, I think that researchers and subjects are morally permitted to come to an (informed) agreement whereby the subjects autonomously choose to waive their right to withdraw (Chwang [2], p. 370).…”

Participant Withdrawal: Challenges and Practical Solutions for Recruitment and Retention in Clinical Trials

“…Thus, being honest and forthright with our participants about their right to withdraw and making concentrated efforts to keep them engaged with the research is of utmost importance. Chwang (2008) argues that in some situations, the researcher and the participant need to sign an agreement whereby the participants agree that they waive their right to withdraw. However, we strongly believe that this defeats the autonomous nature of research participation and turns away individuals who may otherwise participate in future research.…”

The evolution of withdrawal: negotiating research relationships in biobanking

“…Because many participants are recruited by virtue of being patients, in order for their choice to be meaningfully voluntary there must be assurance that abstaining or withdrawing will not compromise their current and future clinical care. Safeguards such as voluntariness attempt to compensate for the natural vulnerability of potential participants (Chwang 2008 ).…”