Does Honouring Assent Really Respect the Preferences and Values of Research Participants with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities?

Processes of representative consent and individual assent for those with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) in the research context are intended to protect such individuals from the power imbalance between participants and researchers. However, these protections often lead to exclusionary practices, leaving those with IDD without the opportunity to reap the same benefits from research as other, less vulnerable populations. Current conversations regarding research ethics heavily emphasize relying on participant assent as the solution to exclusionary research practices, as obtaining assent best respects the preferences and values of participants. In response to such arguments, we propose that the extent to which assent serves as a remedy to issues of those with IDD in research is unclear.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
Published
2026-07-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-026-10592-2
Primary Topic
Down syndrome and intellectual disability research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Does Honouring Assent Really Respect the Preferences and Values of Research Participants with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities?

Abraham Graber, Mary McBride
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
Down syndrome and intellectual disability research
article

Does Honouring Assent Really Respect the Preferences and Values of Research Participants with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities?

Abraham Graber, Mary McBride
article en

Abstract

Processes of representative consent and individual assent for those with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) in the research context are intended to protect such individuals from the power imbalance between participants and researchers. However, these protections often lead to exclusionary practices, leaving those with IDD without the opportunity to reap the same benefits from research as other, less vulnerable populations. Current conversations regarding research ethics heavily emphasize relying on participant assent as the solution to exclusionary research practices, as obtaining assent best respects the preferences and values of participants. In response to such arguments, we propose that the extent to which assent serves as a remedy to issues of those with IDD in research is unclear.

Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center (US), The Ohio State University (US)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Down syndrome and intellectual disability research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.