On Research Podcast – The Belmont Report at Belmont: Voices of Research Ethics

To easily navigate through our podcast, simply click on the ☰ icon on the player. This will take you straight to the chapter timestamps, allowing you to jump to specific segments and enjoy the parts you’re most interested in.

1. Episode Opening: Visiting the Belmont Report’s Historic Origins (00:00:12) Alexa McClellan opens at Belmont Manor and Historic Park, where the National Commission began developing the ethical principles that became the Belmont Report.
2. Context for the Belmont Report and Event Overview (00:01:20) The episode connects the Belmont Report to the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and introduces a public commemorative event organized by the Howard County 250 Initiative and co-sponsored by HHS.
3. Episode Introduction and Purpose of the Conversations (00:02:24) Alexa introduces the On Research episode and explains that the episode shares reflections from government regulators, research professionals, and research participants connected to the Belmont Report.
4. Kim Pruim on Bringing the Belmont Story Back to Its Origin (00:03:26) Kim Pruim explains why the Belmont Manor site matters historically and why commemorating the Belmont Report alongside America’s 250th anniversary helps make research ethics more tangible for the public.
5. Federal Research Protections Professionals Reflect on Belmont (00:05:37) Former and current federal employees, including Kristina Borror, Yvonne Nguyen, and Elyse Summers, describe how the Belmont Report has shaped oversight, public trust, and human research protections.
6. Research Professionals on Applying Belmont Principles Today (00:10:29) Andrew Gerber, Dave Borasky, and Ivy Tillman discuss how respect for persons, beneficence, and justice continue to guide IRB work, research ethics, public engagement, and participant protections.
7. Public Understanding and Partnership in Research (00:15:26) Ivy Tillman emphasizes that the public should understand research protections, recognize their rights, ask questions, and be treated as partners in the research process.
8. Participant Voices and the Personal Impact of Research (00:17:45) Jeffrey Wells and Ted Nicolas share how participation in research and service on review boards shaped their understanding of Belmont’s relevance to patient voice, fairness, and informed participation.
9. Mid-Episode Message About CITI Program’s On Tech Ethics Podcast (00:22:49) A brief break promotes CITI Program’s On Tech Ethics podcast and invites listeners interested in technology ethics conversations to subscribe.
10. Lillie Tyson Head on the Human Ripple Effects of Research Harm (00:23:22) Lillie Tyson Head introduces herself through her family and community relationships, underscoring how harm to research participants can affect generations and entire communities.
11. The Belmont Report’s Personal and Systemic Impact on Descendants (00:25:12) Lillie explains how the Belmont Report acknowledged exploitation connected to the Tuskegee study while also supporting healing, forgiveness, reconciliation, restorative justice, and systemic change in research.
12. Why Stories of Research Abuse Must Continue to Be Told (00:27:29) Lillie reflects on her father’s charge to help prevent future abuses and explains why telling the truth about Tuskegee remains essential to memory, accountability, and justice.
13. Accountability, Transparency, and Trustworthiness in Research (00:30:19) Lillie discusses how historical abuses damage community trust and why ethical research requires accountability, transparency, dignity, and demonstrated trustworthiness from researchers and institutions.
14. Hope for the Future of Ethical Research (00:32:57) Lillie points to public apology, the National Research Act, partnerships, community involvement, and a growing focus on trustworthiness as reasons for hope in ethical research.
15. Episode Reflection: Progress, Partnership, and Human Dignity (00:37:39) Alexa closes by reflecting on the people behind the Belmont Report and the importance of building a research enterprise that advances science while honoring every participant’s dignity and worth.
16. CITI Program Bioethics Course Promotion (00:38:19) The episode highlights CITI Program’s research compliance offerings and promotes the bioethics course for learners interested in moral reasoning, ethical decision-making, and research integrity.
17. Educational Disclaimer and Production Credits (00:39:29) The closing disclaimer notes that the podcast is for educational purposes only, explains that views belong to the guests, and provides production and distribution credits

Alexa McClellan: I’m standing in front of a stately 18th century plantation house on a gravel road in the middle of acres of rowing grassy hills. It’s a sunny July day and birds are singing, it’s a slight breeze. And if it weren’t for the occasional growl of an airplane flying by overhead, one could forget that we are only seven miles away from the Baltimore Washington International Airport. I’m at the Belmont Manor and Historic Park, where in 1978, 11 individuals making up the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research met and drafted the ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects, now known as the Belmont Report. This foundational document outlines the unifying ethical principles for research involving human participants, including respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. It would later be used as a guide for the development of the federal regulations that protect human participants in research today.

The report followed on the heels of the revelation of horrible human rights abuses that occurred in federally sponsored medical research studies, most notably the Tuskegee Syphilis Study that was conducted from 1932 to 1972. I’m here today to attend a public event that celebrates the Belmont Report as well as our nation’s 250th anniversary, organized by the Howard County 250 Initiative and co-sponsored by the US Department of Health and Human Services. The event features opening remarks from the HHS office of the Assistant Secretary for Health and the NIH Director, and includes a panel of regulators, researchers, institutional review board members, and research participants. I want to find out the impact that the Belmont Report has had and continues to have on the research enterprise. Let’s see who we can talk with.

Hello and welcome to On Research, a podcast from CITI Program where we explore the forces shaping the research enterprise from policy and regulation to ethics, trusts, and the future of science. I’m your host, Alexa McClellan, and I’m back at home now. Spoiler, I had the opportunity to speak with many individuals at the Belmont event and ask them about what impact the Belmont Report has had on their lives. The people who attended fell into roughly three different categories, current and former government regulators, professionals who work in the trenches every day, applying ethics to research with human participants, and research participants themselves, individuals who have directly benefited from the principles laid out in the Belmont Report. Over the next few minutes, I want to share those conversations with you. Let’s start off by hearing from Kim Pruim, who spoke with me after we returned home about why she organized this event and what she hoped that people would take away from it.

Kim Pruim: My name is Kim Pruim. I serve as the superintendent for Howard County Recreation and Parks where I oversee Belmont Manor and Historic Park, Historic Beverly Mansion and the Inn at Mount Ida in Ellicott City. I also have the privilege of serving as chair of HoCo250, which is Howard County’s initiative commemorating America’s 250th. While many people recognize the Belmont Report as one of the most influential documents in modern research ethics, very few people realize that the commission’s work began right here at Belmont. As I began exploring ways to commemorate America’s 250th and the approaching 50th anniversary of the Belmont Report, it became clear that this story deserved to be shared with our community.

Alexa McClellan: Wonderful. Thank you so much. Why was it important to hold this event at the original Belmont site rather than in a conventional conference setting? And why celebrate the Belmont Report now?

Kim Pruim: Absolutely. So the timing couldn’t have been more meaningful. As I touched on before, as our nation is reflecting on 250 years of history, and while the Belmont Report is approaching its 50th anniversary, it’s a document whose influence extends far beyond the research community. Belmont’s not just a beautiful historic estate. It’s a place where members of the National Commission gathered to begin conversations, which ultimately led to the Belmont Report. There’s something profoundly meaningful about returning to the place where history was made. Too often, history is discussed in classrooms or conference centers disconnected from the places where it actually happened. Historic sites have a unique ability to connect people emotionally with the past. Standing in the same rooms where these conversations began creates an experience that simply can’t be replicated elsewhere. Belmont provided the perfect setting to honor both our nation’s history and an achievement that continues to influence medicine, science, and public trust today. So it was my honor to welcome everyone back to Belmont.

Alexa McClellan: As I mingled at the event, I was surprised and gratified to see so many current and former federal employees from the Office for Human Research Protections, the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, and the US Department of Health and Human Services, individuals like Kristina Borror.

Kristina Borror: I’m Kristina Borror and I was formally with OHRP. I worked there for 16 years. I started as a compliance analyst, and then I was the director of compliance oversight for about 10 years. And it was just such a wonderful place to work. And the Belmont Report was super important to the work that we did.

Alexa McClellan: Absolutely. And what brought you out to the event today?

Kristina Borror: Well, first of all, to commemorate the Belmont Report, but also I thought it would be a great opportunity to see some of my former colleagues and to hear what people had to say about the historical impact of the report.

Alexa McClellan: Absolutely. What has the Belmont Report meant to you in your long career working with Research Evans?

Kristina Borror: Well, it was like our Bible. And for me, it was really beautiful that we had this ethical principles under which some regulations, which are usually very dry and boring, and to have that be the basis of those was really special to me. And I think that anytime there was some question about how to interpret the regulations to look at that report to get a little bit of clarity.

Alexa McClellan: Other federal employees came out to support their colleagues like Yvonne Nguyen. Yvonne is commenting as a private citizen.

Yvonne Nguyen: I’m Yvonne Nguyen and I am currently working for the office of Assistant Secretary for Health. And the Office on Human Research Protections is one of the co-hosts, so I’m here to support my colleagues. So my role is more oversight across a lot of the offices at my agency and in my collaborations with the Office on Human Research Protections and the Office of Research Integrity. We have visibility into a lot of the behind the scenes work that they do. And I know that it’s a challenging environment when you’re constantly trying to keep up with all the changes in how human research protections are being done and just the volume that they’re managing right now. And I think it’s really important to maintain that level of visibility because I know that it’s an ongoing work to improve the public view of the work that HHS and other partners do and being able to work with them to gain trust and continue to build the research.

Alexa McClellan: Elyse Summers, president and CEO of AAHRPP and former government employee herself, came out to celebrate a document that has indisputably made a positive impact in the world.

Elyse Summers: My name is Elyse Summers, and I am currently the president and CEO of AAHRPP, the accrediting body in human research protections programs. And prior to that, I served at the Office for Human Research Protections as a division of education director until for many years. And before that, I was with the Office for Protection from Research Risks when it transitioned from OPRR to OHRP in 2001. And it’s wonderful to be here. And I think especially in these times, it’s incredible and wonderful to give an honor what happened at the Belmont meeting in 1976. And it is timeless and evergreen because I don’t think anybody can argue with the notions of respect and beneficence and justice.

Alexa McClellan: Can you tell me a bit about what the Belmont Report means to you personally and how it’s affected your work?

Elyse Summers: Well, what it means to me personally is that it provides a bedrock from which we can make our decisions and think about things and deliberate on the tough issues. And again, respect, beneficence, and justice. We’re so key and continue to be, and it just informs everything we do. A lot of government reports are put on a shelf and grow dusty or irrelevant over time. And this really has stood the test of time. I feel so privileged to have spent a large portion of my career in this field, and the people I’ve met along the way have been incredible.

Alexa McClellan: The event also drew many research professionals from academia, industry, and support organizations. People like Andrew Gerber, David Borasky, and Ivy Tillman.

Andrew Gerber: My name is Andrew Gerber and I work for an academic health center, Cooper University Healthcare, which is located in Camden, New Jersey. And what brought me today was really just working within the field of research and seeing all the changes that we have, especially on a federal level within the past several years to come to an event that really supports the idea of integrity in research, supports the idea of upholding the kinds of values and principles that we’ve based all of what we do upon, felt really important.

Alexa McClellan: Absolutely. Can you tell me how you use the Belmont Report principles in your daily work?

Andrew Gerber: Yes. So as a kind of adjunct to our institutional review board, the Belmont Report Principles are really something that I return to to center on when we’re thinking about things like how our board members do the work that they do when we’re talking about tackling some of the stickier issues that come up in research ethics. I often find that coming back to the Belmont Report Principles is a very centralized way to revisit the issue when let’s say the FDA regs or HHS regs specific to human research don’t necessarily answer our question. We can come back to these broader principles to help us answer what we need to and think a little bit more broadly so that we can focus in on whatever it is that we’re working through.

Alexa McClellan: Can you tell me why you came today?

Andrew Gerber: I think really, to be perfectly honest with you, I just wanted to come to this event to celebrate this topic. I really enjoy personally also getting a basis in history. So I visited other places like in the city of Nuremberg in Germany where the trials occurred. So that’s just something I do. And I love to use history as a reason and a way to make all of it come to life and connect through for me and mean something a little more.

Dave Borasky: My name’s Dave Borasky. I’m Vice President for Compliance and Quality Assurance with WCG IRB, but I’ve been doing IRB work since the late ’90s, since the late 20th century.

Alexa McClellan: Fantastic. And what brought you to the event today?

Dave Borasky: Well, having been in IRB work so long, I mean, Belmont has a storied thing and I had always heard about it, had never been here though. So I thought this was a really great opportunity. I live in North Carolina, but it’s a quick flight up. I though I’d come up for the day and I could see people I haven’t seen over the last several years and hear speakers talk about the importance of the Belmont Report. And as an IRB nerd, it was a can’t miss opportunity. Years ago, I served on the PRIM&R Board and at the same time as Bob Levine and Charlie McCarthy who were here for all the original commission meetings. And so it’s nice to be someplace that I heard them talk about for all of those years and the work they did here and the deliberations and hear that backstory to it because obviously it all occurred at a time where there wasn’t social media and there wasn’t blogs happening.

And so they didn’t necessarily work in secret. It’s just that information didn’t disseminate in the same way. And I wish they were still with us today to be a part of that and to hear their perspectives sitting in a place where they were all those years ago working out the details of the report. So it’s really great to be here in privilege and to see so many of our federal friends who have so much on their plates at a time where there’s proposed rules for the FDA and there’s now a new proposed common rule tweak. So there’s a lot going on.

Alexa McClellan: Can you tell me a bit about why you think it’s important that we keep talking about the Belmont Report?

Dave Borasky: Well, I mean I think it’s important. That panel that spoke today in particular kept talking about trust. And to me that trust has to be earned and it starts with respect for persons. I mean, all the principles have equal importance, but it’s the respect for persons is that point where you start to interface with a potential participant, whether they’re a patient or a healthy volunteer or a student or what have you. With our IRB, the Belmont Principles and the Belmont Report are things we reference all the time. I think in entirely good ways, it remains a very concise document. People talk about the fact that you could read the Belmont Report and it’s very digestible for anybody. And I think that gives it some of its timelessness as well as the fact that they did such a great job of describing these principles succinctly and making them approachable and they’ve remained resilient.

Ivy Tillman: I am Ivy Tillman. I’m the executive director for PRIM&R Public Responsibility and Medicine in Research. And I am here because I was one of the panelists to discuss the Belmont Report.

Alexa McClellan: Can you talk a bit about why you think it’s important that we have this conversation right now?

Ivy Tillman: I think it’s important now more than ever, particularly the Belmont Report was those ethical principles and that framework that’s guided the protections of human participants in research for over 50 years. And as we continue to advance in science and we progress, research ethics is needed now more than ever. I think the Belmont guides us to where we need to go next. I think it’s important for us to have conversations with the public. And so what’s really unique and special about this event was IRB professionals, scientists, researchers, but also the public. And that understanding of why Belmont was important then, why it’s enduring, and why we need it now more than ever.

Alexa McClellan: Can you talk a bit more about what you hope the public takes away from this?

Ivy Tillman: Great question. So a couple of things. I hope the public, those who aren’t aware, take away that there’s a whole system. The research ethics enterprise system is here for their protections, that we’re thinking about them at the federal level, at the academic level, within corporations and organizations, that their protections is paramount and it’s fundamental. That they have rights and that they have the ability to understand exactly what’s happening in research, to ask questions, and that they’re partners in this. It’s not research done to them, it’s research done with them. And so that we want them to be partners in the research endeavors.

Alexa McClellan: Wonderful. Thank you. And can you speak a little bit more about what the Belmont principles have meant to you personally and professionally?

Ivy Tillman: Oh, wow. Oh, wow. Okay. That’s a loaded question. So like I talked about on the panel, I was a study coordinator, and so I actually consented participants in studies. So I was every day living out all the principles, the selection of participants, understanding the risk-benefit ratio and respect for persons, ensuring that I respected the autonomy of individuals, not just individuals, but their families as well, and making this decision to participate. So Belmont has been fundamental for me in my career from a research coordinator to where I am now at PRIM&R. It’s been my north star. It’s guided me. It’s been the best teaching tool that I’ve ever had. I always would begin with those Belmont Principles for investigators, for researchers, and for the public. So when I’m doing engagement with the public, I lead from Belmont. So it’s been very important for me and in my career.

Alexa McClellan: There was another group of individuals present at this gathering. Individuals who have felt the impact of research in their life personally, and who have committed to sharing their stories and giving back.

Jeffrey Wells: Hi, I’m Jeffrey Wells. I worked for the state of Maryland for the prison system for 20 years. Then I wound up getting sick. Had a stroke, very serious medical conditions, long recovery. But I’m in Baltimore, which is a very good medical town. So there were a lot of rehab studies. And I just was around a lot of people that were not accepting that we stayed where we are. And then several patients got asked to talk to doctors that were doing a research study. I didn’t know what a PCORI was, but they were being funded and they were talking to patients and they just brought a couple of us along right at the beginning before the protocol was written and helped me learn. The person that was responsible for answering questions had two preteen daughters. So she was used to teaching you, but not making you feel dumb for not knowing. So I really believe all studies need to have a mom because that really helped me.

And that led me to help me with another study, being a patient voice on the data safety monitoring board. And that led me to be joining an IRB and then another IRB. So I’m with the University of Maryland’s IRB and NIH’s IRB. Still as a non-scientist, as a public member, but also prisoner representative because people that are incarcerated or committed to psychiatric hospitals don’t have free will. So I definitely need to look and make sure that they aren’t being coerced or that it’s fair for them and a benefit. The great thing about the IRBs or the research is it’s all different and everything is based on a research question. And they realize that people want to find out and to learn more. And even if we don’t learn this, we’ve learned that this doesn’t work. So even in negative is not a bad thing. It’s not knowing is the worst thing. So we’re better off than we were a year ago.

Alexa McClellan: Wonderful. And what has the Belmont Report meant to you personally?

Jeffrey Wells: It’s meant that not only me, but others not only have a voice, but are though of before and as studies are done. I told somebody, you don’t go to church once when you’re six years old and then you’re good enough. Sometimes you nudge off the straight narrow. And the Belmont Report rereading that keeps me focused on making sure that we need to make things safe and understandable. It’s not an us and them consideration. It’s let us learn together.

Ted Nicolas: My name is Ted Nicolas. I am one of the panelists here at the Belmont Report. I am a sickle cell patient. I am one of the beneficiaries of the good work that the Belmont Report has been doing. To get here, I’ve done a lot of research and I wanted to give back. I do a lot of research on my own. 20 years ago, I was part of a research with NIH, with one of the programs that they were running out called hydroxyurea, which significantly changed my health to get me finally a cure. Five years ago, six years ago actually, I participated in the stem cell transplant. And today, fast-forward, I am totally healed. And I’m here because I wish to give back. I give back to those who are suffering from sickle cell disease or other diseases, letting them know that there are other avenues out there to receiving help or eventually relief a cure.

Alexa McClellan: Can you tell me a bit about what the Belmont Report means to you personally?

Ted Nicolas: Well, the Belmont Report to me is a living document because when I was going through the consent part of my research, I was given this huge document. It took me a while. First, I just tossed it to the side. But I went to the library, I looked up old reports and I realized that, oh, this is about the Tuskegee report. The things that happened in early the 1960s on and beyond, decades before I was born. So to me, this document exemplifies why we’re here today. This document has helped so much, and I’m highly appreciative of that because the document continues to live on to people like myself and others that have benefited from it.

Daniel Smith: I hope you were enjoying this episode of On Research. If you are interested in conversations about technology ethics, join me, Daniel Smith for CITI Programs podcast On Tech Ethics. You can subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts. Now, back to your episode.

Alexa McClellan: While there were many people who spoke at the Belmont event, there was only one who received a standing ovation. This individual talked with me at home a few days after the event. And I’ll let her introduce herself.

Lillie Tyson Head: My name is Lillie Tyson Head, and I’m the president of Voices for Our Father’s Legacy Foundation, a nonprofit organization that was started in 2014 by descendants of the men who were unwittingly in a part of the United States Public Health Service Study of Untreated Syphilis at Tuskegee in Macon County, Alabama. I’m the daughter of Freddie Lee Tyson who was in the study. I’m a wife, a mother of three children, and a grandmother of three. I’m a sister to six siblings. And I’m a granddaughter, a niece, a cousin, an aunt, a friend, a teacher, a church member, a community member, and I’m just one person you see. But there are others whom I interact depend on, and they depend on me. And the reason I introduce myself in this manner is because when a research subject or participant is harmed or exploited, the ripple effects extends far beyond the individual in many, many ways.

Alexa McClellan: Thank you so much for reminding us about how important our relationships are in our identity. Can you briefly explain how the Belmont Report has impacted you and your family personally?

Lillie Tyson Head: The Belmont Report has impacted my family and the families of all of the descendants in that study, both personally and systematically. How so? First of all, it recognized and acknowledged the exploitation that the men had endured and how it happened not only to them, the men in the study, but also to their descendants or generations. We are now in the fourth generations that we have documented of those men. And the study still affects them, but it gives us hope for the future. It also allows us to have an open mind for consideration of moving forward to forgiveness, healing, reconciliation, and restorative justice. Systematically, it has changed the way research is done for the world, not only just for us. And we interact and we are humans and we are part of that society and that community of the world. So this is how the Belmont Report affects us. Most importantly is because it opens our minds up to moving forward with healing and forgiveness.

Alexa McClellan: Lillie, you told a profound story of your father’s experience and your uncle’s experience at the Belmont event that we attended and that you spoke at. Can you tell us why it’s important to keep telling those stories?

Lillie Tyson Head: First of all, there are a lot of reasons for that. And I will start personally with the love and the commitment that I have for my father. And that is when he learned that he was in this study. And I asked him a few days after he had officially learned that he was in this study from a gentleman from the CDC back in 1972. That was in the fall. And I asked my father, how did he feel about what had happened to him in that study and how he was used? And my father said, “I can’t do anything about what has happened to me and all of those other men, but it’s up to you all to make sure that something like this never happens again. So I believe that I should be working and using my voice and encouraging others to use their voice, especially the descendants, to make sure that this study doesn’t happen again.”

My uncle and my cousins that were in the study, Rufus Neal, Ruben Neal and Ed Chisholm, like everyone else, we didn’t know anyone was in the study. We didn’t know the study existed until after it was made public. And that was by TV station on the news, local news, newspaper articles. And then my father had learned about it from really the beginning of it from my brother Wallace. These stories are important because they show how things can go awry if they are not known, how injustice can be camouflaged, it can be denied, and history can be rewritten. So we have to keep telling these stories so that they will not be forgotten. They will be remembered, and most importantly, we can tell the truth about what happened with that study.

Alexa McClellan: What do you wish researchers better understood about the impact of historical abuses such as the Tuskegee study?

Lillie Tyson Head: Well, first, I would like for the researchers to recognize the impact of how a study gone wrong like this. And when accountability and transparency is not prevalent or accessible or available in a study like this, it makes the whole community distrusting of the medical world and healthcare. And until that is fully understood and practiced, it will be quite difficult, if not impossible, for research to be done ethically and more importantly, morally.

And by knowing about the study as well as other atrocities that have happened in particular communities, they have to be recognized and acknowledged that they happen not to place guilt or blame, but to understand that you cannot be prejudiced and use certain myths, disbelief, and racial attitudes to make up, I won’t say stories, but to make up decisions about how certain people should be treated and what type of attention they should be given. Everyone is human and every human being deserves respect and they deserve dignity and they deserve the best and most proper healthcare that they can receive regardless of their race, their social, economic, and educational wherewithals. They’re human beings first, and that’s the way they should be treated.

Alexa McClellan: In answering my first question, you ended on hope, and you said that is why it’s so important that we keep talking about the Belmont Report. And I want to ask you, what gives you hope about the future of ethical research?

Lillie Tyson Head: Well, first of all, that Belmont. Well, actually, the Research Act, and before the Research Act was the president’s apology for the study to the surviving men, five of whom were at the apology ceremony in Washington, DC. And so that was hopeful, but it was just the first step, and the words were encouraging and inspiring. And then we had the research act that came about after the investigation, and that was hopeful. But we also found that some of the details in the history was a little confusing and muddy and unclear. And the humanization of the men were left untouched. It was only about the research. But now, because of where we are, the foundation, and our partnership with other stakeholders, such as the agencies that were responsible for the study in the first place, are coming together to recognize the harm that was done and how we can come to reconciliation and restorative justice together and move forward, making sure that, first of all, the study doesn’t happen again.

And also because we want to make sure that everyone has a possibility or an opportunity to get good healthcare. Another thing that gives me hope is because of that partnership and engaging in community participants in the IRBs. It’s not just all scientists and medical professionals. You have to get some community people and lay people involved in that process, and that’s hopeful. And importantly enough, I’m hearing more about trustworthiness in this whole process now, not so much going right to they don’t trust me, or a community doesn’t trust me, and we can’t do anything because they don’t trust me. And that responsibility should not be placed on the community and the patient to be placed on the doctors and the researchers and those people.

So the trustworthiness has to begin with there, and that has to be demonstrated day in and day out. You show that you are there to do no harm and to help everyone to the best of your ability and your knowledge. And hopefully, to me, that’s a good sign of moving forward in a positive way. So I’m hopeful, and I hope that by coming to your podcast, here we are talking. I never would’ve thought this would be 10, 15 years ago we would be at this point. But thank you for having us and letting us share our voice because we have to address how things must change. And the marginalized people, no matter who they are, what race they are, and where they’re from, they must be given the benefit of being shown trustworthiness, and then they will trust.

Alexa McClellan: As I left Belmont that afternoon, I found myself thinking less about a report and more about the people behind it. The people who wrote it, the people who apply its principles every day, and the people whose lives have been changed because of it. While many of the stories we heard acknowledged painful chapters in our history, the event itself was ultimately a celebration of progress, partnership, and hope. It was a reminder that when we listen, learn, and work together, we can build a research enterprise that advances science while honoring the dignity and worth of every person who makes that progress possible.

CITI Program offers self-paced courses in research compliance, including human subjects research, responsible conduct of research, research security, and bioethics. Throughout this episode, we’ve explored how the Belmont Report emerged from difficult lessons in our nation’s history and continues to influence ethical research today. If you’d like to dive deeper into the questions behind those principles, consider CITI Program’s Bioethics course. The course explores moral reasoning, ethical decision-making, and the complex issues that arise when science, medicine, and human values intersect. It’s an opportunity to better understand not only what ethical research requires, but why it matters. Enhance your skills, deepen your expertise, and lead with integrity across research settings. If you’re not currently affiliated with a subscribing organization, you can sign up as an independent learner and access CITI Program’s full course catalog. Check out the link in this episode’s description to learn more.

As a reminder, I want to quickly note that this podcast is for educational purposes only. It is not designed to provide legal advice or legal guidance. You should consult with your organization’s attorneys if you have questions or concerns about the relevant laws and regulations that may be discussed in this podcast. In addition, the views expressed in this podcast are solely those of our guests. Evelyn Fornell is our line producer, and production and distribution support are provided by Raymond Longaray and Megan Stuart. Thanks for listening.