The Inducement of Meaningful Work: A Response to Anderson and Weijer

James A. Anderson and Charles Weijer take the wage payment model proposed by Neil Dickert and Christine Grady and extend the analogy of research participation to unskilled wage labor to include just working conditions. Although noble in its intentions, this moral extension generates unsavory outcome...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inTheoretical medicine and bioethics Vol. 26; no. 5; pp. 427 - 430
Main Author Eachern, Terrence P Mc
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Netherlands Springer Nature B.V 01.10.2005
Subjects
Employment - economics
Employment - ethics
Ethics, Research
Human Experimentation - ethics
Humans
Research Subjects - economics
Salaries and Fringe Benefits
Work - economics
Work - ethics
Analytical Approach
Biomedical and Behavioral Research
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1386-7415
1573-1200
DOI10.1007/s11017-004-7582-0

Cover

More Information
Summary:James A. Anderson and Charles Weijer take the wage payment model proposed by Neil Dickert and Christine Grady and extend the analogy of research participation to unskilled wage labor to include just working conditions. Although noble in its intentions, this moral extension generates unsavory outcomes. Most notably, Anderson and Weijer distinguish between two types of research subjects: occasional and professional. The latter, in this case, receives benefits beyond the moral minima in the form of "the right to meaningful work." The problem is that meaningful work can itself be a form of inducement, and consequently, may in fact increase the incidence of inducement contrary to the intentions of the wage payment model.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:1386-7415
1573-1200
DOI:10.1007/s11017-004-7582-0