Important Human Subject

The art of medicine and curing diseases was not always approached in a scientific way. In fact, many advances occurred between 1919 to 1939, after technological advances allowed scientists to apply the scientific method to medical research. At this time, the ethics of using patients as test subjects either for new medicines or as samples for further testing were not considered. An extreme example of this was the Nazi’s using concentration camp inmates – including children – to run painful and invasive experiments. More modern examples are not so easy to identify as unethical, however. While amputating a leg to develop methods to deal with fractures and war wounds is obviously unethical, harvesting cells to develop a vaccine is not so clear cut, as the disadvantage to the patient is hard to identify. Coming from the various Nazi testing and especially the Nuremberg testing and trials, another code of ethics was developed, called the Nuremberg Code.

They used these participants for study. This study lasted 40 years. In 1979, the Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research were published (The Belmont Report). The Belmont Report proposed the following three basic principles for the evaluation of research involving human subjects:

In this case study, there were a few incidents of violations of ethics. In 1998, Callahan recommends that researchers should follow the three ethical issues: Autonomy, beneficence, and human justice. Autonomy is the first ethical principle that a researcher should respect the participate and make sure that informed consent has been given. The participates of this study was not aware the risk or what the study was about and actually could not give consent legally because they were minors. Johnson and Tudor did not give full disclosure of this research to the minors, teachers, or matrons at the orphanage. Beneficence is the second ethical principle; the researcher should maximize

Based from this experiments, The Belmont Report Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research was submitted in April 18,1979 to …….? (“Impact,” n.d.).

Additionally human medical research studies often targeted those who came to public teaching institutions desperately seeking free medical treatment and who generally looked up to doctors and experimenters as experts in the field who were there to help them. While this motivation may seem logical, it is often faulty as many human medical research studies throughout history demonstrate that the motivation of medical researches is often not the care of those currently suffering from a particular condition but the future returns on the cures or medical treatments that may be discovered during the study (McKie). As with many such unethical studies, the participants often do not give consent and are not informed of known dangers to the procedure, medications or lack of treatment. The use of individuals who are poor, uneducated, and lack medical insurance in combination with prestigious university research institutions and the white coated, well-educated researchers motivated by discoveries of cures on the scientific frontier results in abuses of individuals.

It is essential that health care researchers and/or managers abide by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPPA) before sharing any patient health information to the public. The Privacy Rule under HIPPA will permit the sharing of health information without patient permission for payment, treating, and health care operations, and other specified purposes (Koontz, 2015). In addition, the Security Rule under HIPPA is designed to ensure that patient health information is protected from the unauthorized disclosure and access (Koontz, 2015). After all, the increase in health information technology makes it easier for researchers to obtain patient health data (Largent, Joffe, & Miller, 2011). However, the health care researcher

The Belmont Report identified three principles essential to the ethical conduct of research with humans:

One ethical principle is that of respect for persons who are involved in the research. According to the Belmont Report (1979) this principle should honor a person and their autonomous choices, however, the report observes that not all individuals are “capable of self-determination” (sec. Part B 1. Respect for Persons). This incapability requires that those persons be protected (Belmont Report, 1979). Wertheimer (2011) corroborates this in stating that group soft-paternalism is implicit that research should not capitalize on or abuse vulnerable populations, or those population groups who are not able to make rational self-determination. The presence of group soft-paternalism by Wertheimer (2011) in exploiting vulnerable groups also supports the Belmont Report (1979) ethical principle of justice. This principle ensures that persons selected for research are not merely being selected based on their vulnerability (Belmont Report, 1979, sec. Part B 3.

Security breaches of EMRs vary from someone without consent viewing the patient’s information, to a hacker using the information to steal one’s identity. According to Privacy Rights Clearing House, more than 260 million data breaches have occurred in the United States, including those of health related records. Approximately 12 percent of data breaches involve medical organizations (Gellman, 2012). According to Redspin, a provider of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act risk analysis and IT security assessment services, more than 6 million individual’s health records were compromised during a period from August 2009 and December 2010 (Author Unknown, 2010). A provision of the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act requires all breaches affecting 500 or more people to be reported to the Department of Health and Human Services. This reporting is to be accomplished within 60 days of discovery. The Redspin report covering the period above involved 225 breaches of protected health information. The amount of people with access to an individual’s health record creates concern with confidentiality. According to the Los Angeles

The Nuremberg Doctor’s trial of 1946 involves human experimentation performed by the Nazi doctors. These physicians were accused of conducting torturous “experiments” with concentration camp inmates. During these studies, physicians conducted treatments that were not permitted and caused severe injuries to the participants, and in some cases, participants died as a result of this. Prisoners were left to freeze to study more on hypothermia. Later, during December 9th, 1946 to August 20th, 1947 representatives establish a Nuremberg trial to prosecuted these doctors for the atrocities that they committed and 23 out 15 were found guilty. As a result, the Nuremberg code was created to

The first ethical principle stated by the Belmont Report is respect for persons. “Respect for persons incorporates at least two ethical convictions: first, that individuals should be treated as autonomous agents, and second, that persons with diminished autonomy are entitled to protection” (The Belmont Report). The researcher must respect the subjects decisions and be obliged to allow them to take part of the experiment voluntarily. The second

The Nuremberg Doctors Trial of 1946 is the preeminent case recognizing the importance of medical ethics and human rights specifically about human research subjects. The defendants in the trials include Nazi leadership, physicians, and investigators prosecuted for conducting unethical and inhumane medical experiments on civilians and prisoners of war resulting in extreme pain, suffering, permanent injury and often death. The Nuremberg Code, borne of these trials, establishes ethical guidelines for human experimentation to ensure the rights of subjects in medical research. Herein, this writer will first identify and discuss ethical dilemmas presented in the Nuremberg case followed by three

As a new employee, Larry has inherited quite an IT mess. There are many concerning aspects to the problems Larry must address, but first and foremost, is the Patient information leaks must be of top priority. There are any number of ways patient information can be leaked and this organization appears to be suffering from some of them. Let’s look at a few areas.

The department of Health and Human Services protects and guides the health and well being of individuals here in America (Thacker, 2014). They fulfill these duties providing Americans with adequate and efficient health and human services and monitoring services designed to increase the efficiency of care in the health system (Thacker, 2014). One of the services being monitored by the department of Health and Human Services is the electronic health record system, which carries private and vital information of patient’s health record enabling all eligible participating health workers access to these records (Thacker, 2014). A breach of the protective health information of patients in a health organization creates chaos as these are against the health insurance portability and accountability (HIPAA) law (Thacker, 2014). Hence, measure will have to be put in place to determine what caused the breach and how to rectify it to ensure the breach never happens again (Thacker, 2014).

I’ve learned that it’s not necessarily what we find out from research but, where we gathered the information. We should be careful with how we find out information. With all information gathered, we must also gather participants. It is essential that those whom take on the role of scientific researcher of psychology that the guidelines of the American Psychological Association’s Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct be followed (Cozby & Bates, 2015, p. 47). Confidentiality and privacy is very important within research. Confidentiality is an issue when a researcher has assured subjects that the collected data are only accessible to people with permission, generally only the researcher (Cozby & Bates, 2015, p. 50). One major step to ensure proper treatment is to gather informed consents. An informed consent allows all participants to understand all parts of research might influence their active decision of