PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 9, 2002
Human Research Subject Protections Act of 2002 - Amends the Public Health Service Act to require all human subject research conducted, supported or otherwise subject to Federal regulation to be conducted in accordance with the common rule and the vulnerable-population rules, as set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations. Defines such terms according to different regulations for human subject research subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.Requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to review all such regulations to harmonize them where feasible with a subsequent proposed rule, explaining remaining differences.Sets forth the authority of the Secretary to modify regulations.Requires informed consent, as specified.Requires an Institutional Review Board to approve all human subject research proposals.Directs the Secretary to establish criteria for identifying and monitoring high risk clinical trials.Prohibits the use of Federal funds for classified human subject research, as specified.Requires the Secretary to determine whether an entity has violated these requirements, as specified.Establishes an Office of Human Research Protections within the Office of the Secretary to make grants, conduct research and Institutional Review Board audits (requiring corrective action if necessary), and coordinate Federal efforts. Requires the Director to notify the relevant regulatory agency if deficiencies are found.Authorizes the Director of such Office to make grants for the development of a model education program.Requires coordination with the Commissioner of Food and Drugs.Continues the National Research Protections Act Advisory Committee.Requires the Secretary to promulgate regulations addressing the participation of people with diminished decisionmaking capacity in human subject research.
People & committees
Rep. DeGette, Diana [D-CO-1] · D–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4697 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4697 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4697 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4697 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.