National Statement (2007 updated 2018)

Funny cartoon about a participant being crushed under the first consent form.

You can’t sue us mechanism – A Human Research Ethics discussion activity

This discussion activity explores a practical ethical challenge we have created ourselves.  Consent strategies should be about individuals being able to make informed decisions about whether or not to take part in a research project.  What we have ended up with are long documents and forms. They require potential participants to have considerable patience to wait for them and a degree of legal acumen.  The objective now appears to be to establish why you can’t sue the researcher or their host institution.

A cover image for the talk by Nik to the Victoria Ethics Network

Human research ethics and risk, the role of research ethics committees – A Human Research Ethics talk

This is a recording of a Victoria Ethics Network session facilitated by Prof. Nik Zeps, a senior consultant of AHRECS. He is speaking about the role of HRECs with regard to risks, benefits and their weighing. A very handy one hour ten minute talk by an experienced practitioner, who has both served on the committee that drafted the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research and has served/chaired numerous research ethics committees.

Cover image of the talk by Gary Allen and Mandy Downing

Vulnerability, research ethics review and the review of s4 of the National Statement – A Human Research Ethics talk by Gary Allen and Mandy Downing

How we approach vulnerability can empower and respect individuals or compound their isolation and discrimination they face. In this 11 minute talk by Dr Gary Allen and spoken by Mandy Downing. This talk was sponsored by QUT as part of its HREC professional development and the Committe’s active engagement with the National Statement.