According to utilitarian ethics in human research, what is a key condition for justifying the use of participants?

• A. Informed consent is optional
• B. Benefits must outweigh harms for there to be net benefit
• C. No need to minimize harm
• D. It rejects informed consent

Answer: (B)

In utilitarian ethics for human research, the central requirement is that the overall balance of outcomes favors the good: the expected benefits must outweigh the expected harms, producing a positive net benefit. This means you weigh the potential benefits to participants, future patients, and societal knowledge against the risks, burdens, or injuries participants might incur. If the net benefit is positive, the study is ethically justified from a utilitarian perspective; if negative, it is not. This framework doesn’t treat informed consent as the sole deciding factor, and it allows that some harm might occur if the overall benefits justify it. Conversely, simply insisting that harms be minimized—even if the net benefit remains positive—misses the utilitarian calculation. So the idea that benefits must outweigh harms for there to be a net positive benefit is the best description of the utilitarian justification.