User:Hamjm21

The historic Belmont Report (1976) has been heavily supplemented, if not entirely replaced, by the American Psychological Association’s Ethical Guidelines (APA)(2002). The APA’s guidelines include the basics provided in the originally published Belmont Report, but also enhance and reinforce the established principles. Just as the Belmont Report details the principles of beneficence, respect for persons, and justice, the APA details them further and expands the three initial guidelines into five: (1) beneficence, (2) respect for persons, (3) justice, with the addition of (4) fidelity and responsibility, as well as (5) integrity.

The principle of fidelity and responsibility ensures that researchers establish trust and a sense of responsibility for their study and its possible repercussions. The principle of integrity furthers this concept into honesty and accuracy throughout all professional psychological endeavors. The inclusion of the last two principles has become pertinent in modern science and research. As ethical practices are constantly shifting, the frequently revised APA guidelines have, for the most part, replaced the practical use of The Belmont Report. The report currently serves as more of a foundation for the ever-growing caution and attention paid to ethical practices used in psychological experiments.

Another area where the Belmont report falls short is in the standards that it sets. While three of the principles of APA are identical to the Belmont Report, the APA establishes standards for all reputable members of the psychology community (particularly those members of the American Psychological Association). The association sets a code of conduct for all APA individuals, which, when violated, can result in termination of professional licensure or membership. Because the Belmont Report was never adopted by the psychological association, there is no comparable consequence for infringement.

One of the most important standards that is detailed in the APA manual is the one that requires the induction of an institutional review board (IRB), which is responsible for interpreting the established principles and ensuring the ethicality of research done on humans. Some of these standards are visited as topics in the Belmont Report, including the IRBs, which play the same role-- a panel for evaluation of ethical guidelines. Other standards are completely ignored in the Belmont Report and have since been added to the APA manual. One such standard that is omitted in the Belmont Report is the ethical treatment of animals, something that has become a resurgent topic in recent years with the development of animal rights organizations such as PETA and the ASPCA.

The APA Guidelines take a much more modern approach to ethics, given that it is frequently updated (with nearly nine revisions since its original publication), whereas the Belmont Report lacks new information or change in opinion and societal acceptance. Today the Belmont Report serves as a reminder of our ever-changing moral guidelines. While the report was a beneficial first step to ensuring ethical practice, it fails in many areas that the APA Code of Conduct is able to make up. The Belmont Report severely lacks in the protection of major human rights issues. It was in essence, a lackluster collection of regulations in response to the Tuskegee Study (1932-1972), that missed some majorly important components. Even still, the report provided the first stepping stones to modern ethical practice in psychological research.