Command Care Case Study

Cassandra’s case is unique based on her experiences, and therefore a simple norm of autonomy vs. beneficence can not be created, and instead must be weighed differently based on the circumstances of each case. Cassandra should be able to make the erudite decision, and it should be superior to the doctor’s own plans for the course of action. Cassandra should be able to decide what the best course of treatment is for herself, and, if she does not want chemotherapy, then her sentiments should be respected and followed rather than her being forced into treatment and having to live with severe side effects. While doctors are charged with with the necessity to help patients, they must also care about the individual’s own desires - Cassandra’s beliefs should be compromised with rather than trampled

Another example of this construct not met in the case of Henrietta Lacks was the lack of compassionate care. Patient experiences can be improved if healthcare professionals act with compassion and dedication to serve patients and promote their well-being. Henrietta suffered so much pain and complained about the discomfort as complicated by the disease process, but her complaints were ignored; instead, her doctors wrote just the opposite of what she complained about stating, “the patient states that she feels fairly well” and continued, “no evidence of recurrence” (Skloot, 2010, p.63). This is an example of deception, lack of compassion and outright contradiction to professionalism and commitment to the primacy of the patient.

But children are a special case they cannot always stand up for themselves. They therefore need a special set of rights which take in to consideration their vulnerability and which ensures the adults that surround them take responsibly for their welfare, protection and development.

The social contract of nursing is important because it reflects the nursing's code of ethics, which is to provide care to all who are in need, regardless of their cultural, social, or economic standing. The social contract exists because we rely on a guideline to continue to provide ethical care that is within our scope of practice. Unfortunately, in Rebecca Skloot’s (2010) book, “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks” there were many ethical violations throughout the whole process about the Henrietta Lacks’ cells (HeLa). The author reveals the story about the life of Henrietta Lacks, an African American woman who was diagnosed with a fast-growing cervical cancer at a young age. The cells retrieved from her cervical tumor became the first immortal cell that could survive in the lab and replicate continuously without dying. Without the consent of Henrietta Lacks and her family, these cells later became key components to the development of many groundbreaking inventions such as the polio vaccine and in vitro fertilization. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to examine the social covenant of nursing in relation to the ethical issues behind the use of the HeLa cells without the patient’s and her family’s consent.

The appellant of the Cruzan v. Missouri case was the parents of Nancy Cruzan, Joe Cruzan and Joyce Cruzan. The Cruzans argued that when they made the decision to hook Nancy up to a feeding and hydration tube they were unaware that Nancy would be in the vegetative state permanently, they thought she would make it (Cruzan by Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved December 8, 2015, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/1989/88-1503).

The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks is a true story of a poor, Southern African-American tobacco farmer who died in 1951 at the very young age of 31 years old from cervical cancer. Little did she know that cells harvested from her tumor, which were obtained without her consent have lived on and on and became one of the most important tools in medicine today. Despite Henrietta’s story being full of legal and ethical issues, the story was one filled with success and anguish. Success for science as her cells served as advancement in medical research and development; yet was sorrowful for Henrietta and her family. This story occurred during a time of segregation in the United States, when Henrietta Lacks believed she

“He told them he was testing their immune systems; he said nothing about injecting them with someone else’s malignant cells” (Skloot 128). This is one of the many incidences in Skloot’s book, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, where Skloot argued that medical research and advancements were held at a higher importance than fair treatment and rights of the patients and their families. Henrietta and the Lacks family are just one example. Skloot developed her argument by including information about uninformed consent and the Lacks family, providing examples of instances where doctors took advantage of their patients for their own benefit, and gave information about the Lacks family and their current medical situations. In order to adequately

This idea was blatantly ignored with the treatment of Henrietta and many others. Henrietta was a living, breathing, human being, that deserved equivalent treatment. She was instead, dehumanized into cells, her privacy invaded, and her family permanently damaged from the experience. Henrietta was not immortal. In reality, “Henrietta died at 12:15 a.m. on October 4, 1951” (86). From the unethical treatment she received to the blatant disregard for empathy with regard to her deathly illness, Henrietta was maltreated. John Moore’s case exposes the widespread nature of this problem. “It was very dehumanizing to be thought of as Mo,” claims Moore (201). “...I was Mo, I was the cell line, like a piece of meat” (201). John Moore endured the same as Henrietta. Both viewed as abstractions, their truths ignored. They both, however, hold a triumph. They contributed to the betterment of society, and helped to advance medical practices and cured countless

Goldman’s critique of medical paternalism demonstrates the right for patient autonomy and decision to choose a treatment best suited to their needs and interests. Initially, physicians would not announce any form of cancer to their patients, as it was believed to result in physiological distress. Luckily, medical paternalism continues to be rejected in medical situations; the topics of outcomes research, scientific evidence, and court decisions help correct patient decisions on the best treatment.

When Henrietta signs the form, she is unaware of the types of procedures that doctors can perform under her “consent” or the damaging effects the operation could have on her body, seeing as doctors never clarified the possible side effects of her procedure. In reference to Henrietta’s treatment, the author states, “Toward the end of her treatments, Henrietta asked her doctor when she'd be better so she could have another child. Until that moment, Henrietta didn't know that the treatments had left her infertile”. Furthermore, this quote demonstrates the harmful effects of poor communication between patient and doctor, in that Henrietta had been ill-informed of possible side effects before the operation. In addition, if Henrietta had been aware of this knowledge, she may have opted for a different treatment plan or refused treatment, which may have changed the outcome considerably. While Henrietta did sign the consent form agreeing to any necessary procedures, she never imagined that her cells would be used to create a multi-million dollar industry for research, all without the knowledge or consent of her or her family. While consent forms today still contain minor flaws, they have improved greatly since Henrietta’s time to ensure the patient’s rights are

In Rebecca Skloot’s pioneering non-fiction book, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, the complex story about the revolutionary HeLa cancer cells is told through the lives of the Lacks family and the multiple scientists and doctors that were part of one of the greatest breakthroughs of medical research in the twentieth century. The tale of the infamous and immortal HeLa cells was not just a scientific one, but one that involved struggle, confusion, ethical transgressions, and legal issues. Skloot writes about the life of Henrietta Lacks and her immortal cancer cells as well as her own research endeavor. Henrietta grew up with a very large family who all lived together and sometimes married internally. She eventually married and had kids with her first cousin, David. As an adult, Henrietta suffered from what she called a “knot” in her cervix, medically being cervical cancer. It all started when she started receiving cancer treatment from Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, MD. John Gey had used cells from the tumor for medical research. At the age of 31, Henrietta died from her fatal disease, leaving her cells behind to continue her legacy. Despite the fact that her cells were researched throughout the world, the Lacks family was still living in extreme poverty with little to no opportunities for advanced education. Johns Hopkins conveyed limited information about Henrietta’s cells to her family to the extent that some family members did not even understand what a cell

The conversation of consent to medical research of one’s tissues is critical due to the increasing number of discoveries in the field of medicine. In the 1950s, Johns Hopkins Hospital encountered one example of an ethical problem regarding education in the realm of medical research. Rebecca Skloot’s The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks does well in elaborating on this conflict. This true story involves an African American woman who, while undergoing treatment for cervical cancer, has her cells extracted from her without permission. Skloot achieves a more personal level of the story by describing the lives of Henrietta’s children, then and now, in addition to the story of Henrietta herself. Unfortunately, the Lacks family had a poor

The concept of informed consent that we have today did not exist in the 1950s when Henrietta’s cells were obtained. Patients were regularly used in research without their knowledge. Nevertheless, some doctors had unethical standards. Dr. Chester Southam, a credible researcher of cancer, developed a theory that “the cancer was caused by either a virus or an immune system deficiency” (Skloot 128) and the bodies of patients’ who had suffered with cancer in the past would reject the HeLa cells. He tested the patients and “he said nothing about injecting them with someone else’s malignant cells” (Skloot 128). Southam believed that revealing details to patients would create a “phobia and ignorance” (Skloot 130) in their mind. He injected “more than six hundred people for his research, about half of them cancer patients” (Skloot 129), telling them “he was testing their immune systems” (Skloot 128). Southam expanded with his experiments on testing

In her book, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, Skloot opens up the story about an African American woman named Henrietta Lacks, the unfair and unethical treatment she underwent in Hopkins hospital, and the discovery of the immortal HeLa cells (Skloot, 2010). Skloot (2010) also includes stories about multiple other patients who experienced unfair and unethical treatment from their doctors. This paper will provide an ethical analysis of the book, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, to depict the major unethical actions made (which breached The Belmont Report’s principles) toward the patients and family of the patients as well as discuss its overall relevance to nursing care we do today as compared to the way it was done during Henrietta Lacks’ days.

In the mid-1900’s as opposed to today’s world, consent was not needed for tests to be performed on one’s body and used for experiments or research. The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, written by Rebecca Skloot, focuses on one of the most famous medical breakthroughs which used cells taken from Henrietta Lacks, an African American cancer patient, without her consent. Henrietta had Stage I Cervical cancer and was being treated at Johns Hopkins hospital. Henrietta was treated as a science experiment; she went through harsh forms of radiation and her cancer cells were extracted from her body and used for research. George Gey was the first to discover that her cancer cells were unique due to the fact that they never died.