Donating Human Tissue

I believe that the Lacks family should without a doubt be compensated for the HeLa cells. There were so many unethical things done to not only Henrietta but here family as well especially with the DNA blood samples that were taken and they deserve the right to be compensated. So many scientist made money off of the cells

Dying painfully in a hospital bed is not the way anyone wants to go. Unfortunately for many people, it is a reality. Thousands of people a year end up dying while waiting for an organ that could save their lives. While on the other side of the world, thousands of people die a year, but from infection when an organ is forcefully taken from them to sell on the black market. There are two sides of the organ donation list, and both can end in death. This paper will discuss the shortage of donated organs and the issues with the current donation system. It will also discuss the black market for transplant organs and possible solutions to viable organ shortage. The focus of this paper will be on transplant kidneys as they are the most desirable organ for buyers and sellers.

Organ donation provided a new therapeutic path when new drugs and devices failed to reduce the mortality and morbidity rate of patients with such illnesses as cardiovascular diseases. By replacing damaged organs or tissue with a functioning substitute, organ transplantation offers an immediate cure. Unfortunately, this “cure” is never guaranteed because of the high risk of graft rejection and that’s if a suitable donor can be found. Thus, tissue engineering has been the projected new treatment for these problems. Tissue engineering replaces the diseased or damaged tissue or organs with biofabricated counterparts made using the specifications dictated by the features of the specific tissue or organ.

As an American, we are asked whether if in a car accident or inevitable death, our organs can be harvested and donated to people in need. This takes away the question of whether someone in your family should be compensated for their donation. The Lacks family, once they discovered the amount of money circulating due to the HeLa drug, believed they had a legal right to it because it was made up of their own DNA. But, if you look at is as if Henrietta had put a donor sticker on her driver’s license, no family member, that I know of, has ever asked for compensation on an organ that was donated after a serious accident. The Lacks family if they had decided to refuse the ability to study and sell the HeLa drugs could have set back scientific discoveries years with many casualties that were saved because of the medicine’s developed. Yes, the family was poor and oppressed but that was not necessarily going to change with the money given to them by the hospital. The money, of course, would have contributed them to providing them a better life, but the system is main offender, not the hospital. Many people of color faced the same challenges the Lacks family did because of the injustices present in our government and

Doctors were not telling their patients everything and would sugar coat things to make the donation or operation as less scary as posse so they will agree to it. One of the most famous person to get mistreated was Henrietta Lacks or HeLa. She died in her thirties in the mid-nineteenth century but the one thing she and her family had no idea was that scientists and doctors were growing her cells in a laboratory. Henrietta had no idea that her cells were growing in a dish in a laboratory somewhere and that her cells would help change the world by advancing medicine and science for the rest of anyone’s life.(Skloot, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks.) But there are more than likely millions of cases that ended up like Henrietta but are not as talked about. Patient’s rights is a right that we can not take for granted and make sure people are not taking your tissue without your

As for the family members who shall receive benefits, the children and grandchildren of Henrietta, for example Lawrence, Zakariyya, and Davon, should receive actual monetary and health benefits. As for the descendants after Henrietta’s grandchildren, they should receive at the least free health care. This can be compared to the health insurance families of American soldiers receive, VA Health Care. These families receive these aids because their loved ones have risked their lives for the good of the country. For the families of Henrietta the same principle applies; Henrietta’s cells have saved and continue to save so many lives in this country and others. As for the amount of money to be bestowed, that can be decided once the corporations who shall compensate the Lacks are identified. Often times when medical research and the term compensation come into contact many academics claim it is the end of scientific study. Scientists worry that stringent regulations requiring specific consent for any future uses of bio specimens could hamstring

To even begin to understand how poorly Henrietta and her family were treated, it must be known that scientists collected Henrietta’s cells without her knowledge. "Everybody always saying Henrietta Lacks donated those cells. She didn't donate nothing. They took them and didn't ask… we didn't know nothing about those cells and [they] didn't care,” one of Henrietta’s five children, Zakariyya told Skloot (Skloot 169). I firmly believe that patients should be able to provide consent, or at least be informed of the collection and use of their tissue for scientific research. In addition to withholding information from her

Consent to do anything to someone else’s property is necessary for almost all other circumstances and should be applied in this situation. If not stated in the consent form, patients should explicitly have the rights to say what happens to their cells. As a result of being given rights to their cells, donors may be more willing to donate. Being able to dictate over what happens to a piece of them may encourage many to donate rather than have the opposite effect. Even when consent forms are signed, many patients do not recognize the importance of their tissue for research. Due to this, in the cases of several patients, they do not become aware of the importance of their tissue until much later. In the case of Mo and HeLa cells, their doctors had made their cells into multi-billion dollar industries, even though the patients had not explicitly consented to the for-profit companies created around their cells. To protect Americans from having their rights violated like in these instances, it is necessary that patients be granted the rights to their own

In 1951, Henrietta Lacks went to John Hopkins Hospital because of pain and bleeding in her abdomen and was diagnosed with cervical cancer. During one of her radiation treatments, doctors took samples from Henrietta’s cervix without her knowledge to see if her cells would grow in culture and it did. Her cells were the first immortal cells to grow in culture. From there everything changed. Henrietta’s cells were used to create the polio vaccine, they went in space to what would happen to human cells in zero gravity, and many more. But as HeLa cells were bought, sold, and used for these scientific researches her family did not receive any money from it. Many people think that they should receive financial compensation but they should not.

It is unethical to compensate study participants in research studies. In the book called, “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks,” by Rebecca Skloot, she discussed how the ethics in this circumstance is unanimous and not questionable. Before Henrietta Lacks died from cervical cancer in 1951, a doctor cut out tiny samples of her cancer cells, which will soon become the first and most important human cells to continue to multiply and survive in the laboratory. The problem was, is that they used Henrietta Lack’s tissue without her consent. In the medical field, it was important and a great benefit to all human kind. It was extremely unethical and without the consent of Henrietta and her family, this lead to many questions of the morals of the

Although some may argue that the doctor’s actions were unethical, there were no laws in place; hence, the doctors did not really commit a crime. On top of that, Gey was not the only doctor or researcher of that time who took cells without consent. If this is the case, should not the other uninformed patients, whose tissues or cells were removed but did not contribute to science as much as Henrietta’s did be compensated as well? Only because Henrietta Lacks’s cells resulted in a paramount discovery, many advocate for the need to repay monetarily. Additionally, the ruling that when tissues are removed from one’s body--with or without consent--any ownership of the organs disappears further highlights the lack of need to compensate financially. This controversial ruling allows a larger supply of cells to work

There is no cost to donors or their families for organ or tissue donation. It's illegal to pay someone for an organ.

Our topic is on organ transplant. We will focus on the process and ethical dilemmas surrounding it. Our group chose this topic because we care and understand that this can happen to our love ones. We want to raise our concern about this worldwide issue, and where the black market for organs come into play. The stakeholders include the people (donors or receivers), doctors, government, businesses, and experts. We will be focusing on the culture and the ethical issues that related to organ transplant, conflict of interests, ethics in the design phases, debt/ financing, and regulation. Since our topic is quite detailed, we will start with what is the precise definition of “brain death” in a heart beating body that is kept

Svenaeus, Fredrik. "The body as a gift, resource or commodity? Heidegger and the ethics of organ transplantation." Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 7, no. 2 (2010): 163-172.

    Today, medical operations save lives around the world, a feat that surely would surprise our ancestors. Many operations replace defective organs with new ones; for new organs to be ready to be implanted there need to be organ donors. We are not so advanced a society that we can grow replacement organs. Thousands of organ donors in the United States every year are seen as doing the most noble of deeds in modern civilization, and most of the time death has to occur before the organ can be used. Now, though, some are suggesting that organ donors—or their beneficiaries—should be paid for their donations. This should not happen, as it creates a strain on the already tight national budget, forces