Abstract
In this paper, we argue that Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) have an obligation to clearly articulate, document and be accountable for the reasons for their decisions, and to make their documentation available for external scrutiny. We advance two arguments to support this claim. The first is that this is a legal obligation — that HRECs, by virtue of the way they are established under legislation, are required by law to provide statements of reasons. The second is an ethical argument — even if the legal argument is flawed, there are still compelling ethical reasons for HRECs to operate in this way. We then give an example of what a statement of reasons from an HREC might look like, and urge HRECs to consider whether their decision-making and documentation could meet this model.
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Davies, G., Gillam, L. Articulation and transparency of decision-making by human research ethics committees. Monash Bioethics Review 26, 46–56 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03351465
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03351465