After all, it’s not as if there isn’t a selection of ethical stances that one can take:
A place on a clinical trial is being advertised for $2 million in what is believed to be a world first which medical practitioners hope could transform a funding gap in researching rare cancers.
The trial place is being offered by a research team at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute in Ottawa, led by Dr David Stojdl, to be part of the first human use of the Farmington Virus (FARV) to help combat brain tumours.
Dr Stodjl has said any donor who provides $2 million to enable this trial to go ahead will be guaranteed a place, either for personal use – providing the donor meets the inclusion criteria – or for any suitable patient of the donor’s choice.
His offer is believed to be the first time in medical history that such an attempt to sell a clinical trial place has been made.
Kate Law, director of clinical and population research at Cancer Research UK said the approach “looks to be a major cause of concern” and would not be possible in Britain because of ethical constraints.
Ethics being only, according to the moral principles that I hold, this should not happen. But other people can and do have different morals and thus different ethical stances.
I’m not, btw, commenting upon whether a place on a trial should or should not be auctioned in this manner. Rather, pointing out that “I don’t think this should happen” is not the trump card that it’s being played as.