Iris Giant's Bone: Article Analysis

Research ethics were being debated in US courts so that they could sanctioned in the 1950s. Due to a court case never being made over the issue of Henrietta’s cells being researched on, “it would be decades before anyone thought to ask whether informed consent should apply in cases like [her’s], where scientists conduct research on tissues no longer attached to a person’s body” (Skloot 132). Skloot uses the fact that it was “decades” later till “anyone thought to ask” about tissues detached from the body. Since no one spoke up on this issue there were no court cases like Henrietta’s so researching on her cells was tolerated during that time period. Concurrently in a civil court case, “a patient named Martin Salgo...went under anesthesia for what he thought was a routine procedure and woke up permanently paralyzed from the waist down. The doctor hadn’t told him the procedure carried any risks at all. The judge ruled against the doctor saying… there needed to be ‘full disclosure of facts necessary to an informed consent’ “ (Skloot 132). Skloot employs a specific example of a judge ruling in favor of informed consent with all the risks explained, in order for the reader to question whether the same should apply for conditions like Henrietta’s. Similar to Henrietta’s case, Salgo’s doctor informed him that there were not “any risks” for the medical operation resulting in Salgo being “permanently paralyzed.” Salgo is lied which causes major medical problems that he cannot recover from. As a result, the judge believes that there needs to be “full disclosure of facts” which means the patient must know everything about the medical procedure and any of the risks. Although Henrietta’s cells were no longer a part of her body, she was never informed about

Although Henrietta lacks and John Moore have contributed a lot to the science community their stories has raised many ethical issues concerning the privacy and consent of a patient. Similar cases might not occur so often nowadays because we have established laws that protect a patient's privacy and acknowledges them before making any

John Moore lost the lawsuit against David Golde, according to the judge he had no right “to ownership interest in the patent - he was not one of the inventors. Nor, it concluded, could a patient exercise property rights over discarded body tissues.” (von der Ropp & Taubman, 2006). The loss of the lawsuit by Moore caused a lot of media attention and again a big ethical discussion in science. As previously said, this story also highlighted the importance of ethical and ownership laws in medical research.

Therefore, should people be given compensation if there are any medical discoveries and should people even be informed that their tissue was used in the research for the medical discovery (NWABR 2011)? The problem with giving compensation to Lack’s family is that it brings up the issues that if they are compensated than millions of other people will also need to be compensated for their usage of their cells in

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

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

The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks is a very touching book; this book has really helped me take a new perspective on how patients were treated in hospitals in the 1950s. Also the book demonstrates how patients and research has changed drastically from how they are now compared to back when Henrietta’s cells were being used. Unfortunately Henrietta did not know that her cells were being used for research in the hospital labs, since she was unaware they were using her cells there was no way for her family to try to obtain money from the researchers to help them financially. Also, during this time period most people weren’t given the proper knowledge and consent rights to be used as research unlike today’s standards. Therefore, this leads me

Through the ages, men have been able to find cures for catastrophic diseases through scientific research. Thanks to these advances, men have been able to prolong the life span of people, or provide better quality of life in cases in which a cure of various maladies has not been possible. To achieve such progresses, scientists have made use of prior knowledge, new theories, and technology obtaining numerous prodigious outcomes. Unfortunately, there have been many who have used questionable means for such ends. The German Max Clara is another case of a man with power and knowledge of science, who has misusing them. This paper aims to briefly identify principles and standards that would have been violated these days according to the existing APA Code of Ethics. Finally, ethical implications of making a moral judgment on past actions by researchers regarding human experimentation are discussed.

Throughout our lives, we are plagued by the notion of ‘ethics’ or morals - the basis of our everyday behavior. The medical field is no exception, with doctors constantly reminded of the ethical duties they must carry out for each of their patients. An example of unethical doctors is demonstrated in Daniel Keyes’s short story, Flowers for Algernon. The story features Charlie Gordon, a man with an intellectual disability who strives to become smarter. He is a candidate for a new surgical procedure that is used to triple one’s intelligence which was directed by Dr. Strauss and Dr. Nemur. Although the procedure holds promise for helping a vast amount of people, Dr. Nemur and Dr. Strauss acted unethically by selecting Charlie to undergo the operation because they did not finish testing the procedure and because Charlie was unable to make a proper decision.

“I think people are morally obligated to allow their bits and pieces to be used to advance knowledge to help others” (Korn). Different people have opposing opinions on the topic of whether or not patients or doctors own the body tissues after it’s been removed from the patient. Ownership is the act, state, or right of possessing something. Tissue ownership is different from ownership because once it leaves your body, you no longer own it. Contributing your tissues to the science world is superior because you can speed up medical advances, avoid litigation, and become a better individual by contributing to science and society.

The plurality of biomedical researchers and engineers dedicate their careers to testing the limits of technology and medicine on the human body. However, as innovations become increasingly provocative, the ethics of biomedical research has become quintessential to moving forward into the future of research. I aspire to become a biomedical engineer, but while many of my classes will teach me the raw skills to become an engineer, I feel that a tutorial with Hunter “Patch” Adams would allow me to delve into the ethics of biomedical research in medicine. Patch Adams has spent his life treating patients with an emphasis on their emotional well being, specifically utilizing humor as a complement to treatment. Throughout my life, I too have used humor

For the next 50 years, donating one’s body for scientific cadaver use would become more acceptable and commonplace. However, it wasn’t until 1882 that a medical institution, the Chicago College of Physicians and Surgeons, would offer a curriculum that incorporated cadaver dissection (Perry & Kuehn, 2006). It wouldn’t be until 1918 that an organization, The Anatomical Gift Association of Illinois, would manage the body donation program for medical research and educational institutions (The Anatomical Gift Association of Illinois, 2013).

Anything outside of our permission or control is considered an assault. Despite our beliefs and what should be, this was quite contrary with Henrietta Lacks. An article in The Scientist noted “The global rise in biobanks – currently a $1 billion industry that is expected to grow to $2.25 billion by 2015 – also introduces other ethical concerns, including patenting of biological materials, whether donors control what happens to their tissue, whether donors should be compensated, and the privacy issues dramatically highlighted by the online publication of the HeLa genome.” Enhancing public awareness is paramount around this topic along with engaging in the ethical complexities effectively, which in the end could build awareness, boost trust, and improve an understanding around the purpose of biobanks and how they operate. Henrietta Lacks case presented a beneficial context for analyzing the legal and ethical issues that may be raised when human tissues are being used in medical research.

Clearly, these researchers had their own agenda to acquire a medical breakthrough that would change the history of science and contribute to the greater good of society. However, their authority was used in an unwarranted manner to accomplish their goals, regardless of their respectable intentions in wanting to make medical progress. In reviewing these researchers and medical practitioners’ actions during the 1950’s which entails series of unethical behaviors and violation of human right, it develops an essential need to establish guidelines in the attempt to protect patient’s rights and privacy. Furthermore, due to the alternatives that arise throughout this case, there are many possible outcomes to be considered that could have a significant impact on stakeholders if these courses of action are fallowed. These solutions consequences may involve the tentative research, an advance way of life for the Lack’s family, political turmoil, economic health impact and a society whose cells may have similar experience.

“The unexamined life is not worth living.” With these words, Socrates stated the creed of reflective men and women and set the task for ethics: to seek, with the help of reason, a consistent and defensible approach to life and its moral dilemmas (Walters 22). Ethical inquiry is important to us when we are unsure of the direction in which we are heading. “New philosophy calls all in doubt,” wrote John Donne in the wake of the Copernican Revolution and of Charles I’s violent death, suggesting that new thoughts had challenged old practices (Donne). Today, new practices in the biomedical sciences are challenging old thoughts: “New medicine calls all in doubt” (Walters 22).