Sleep Deprivation: A Research Study

Elements of the Nuremberg code of 1947 includes a 10-point statement of ethical principles created to prevent future abuse of human subjects. As during the time Japan and Nazi Germany subjected human beings to torturous experiments in order to obtain data that might prove useful in their war effort (Fischer, 2006). This document is the foundation for human rights when it comes to medical experimentation worldwide. The most important principle above all is to obtain an informed consent. An informed consent explains in depth all potential benefits and risks. The men who participated in the Tuskegee Study were not provided with an informed consent. A study had been done already on the Norwegian men, which made it clear

Human experimentation has always been a topic of ethical controversy, recently the draw towards this practice has become increasingly more appealing; due to the expanding medical advancements and progress within the last decade. It is obvious why experimenting on humans is an attractive option, but how far can we push these experiments before it's considered criminal and inhumane? Many medical researchers push for the use of human experimentation because of the general good that these experiments may have on not only the medical community but also the general public. However, there are many ethical questions that need to be addressed before such experiment is conducted.

Science, medicine, and psychology are powerful tools capable of increasing human understanding of the world, curing diseases, or assisting individuals in living more fulfilling lives. The potential for good is drastic; however, a potential for hurt exists as well. Although history is full of stories documenting the positives of research, events of scientific research hurting individuals still haunt history. These events, including the Holocaust and the Tuskegee experiments, demonstrate instances where scientific research on human beings is clearly unethical and damaging. Due to horrific events such as these, the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research published the Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research, or Belmont Report, in 1979.

The research ethics, especially with the human subjects, is a very complex topic, and the completion of the certification opened my eyes on many aspects of research process. I learned how important it is to fully understand the research purpose and the methodology especially when selecting participants. I learned which populations are considered vulnerable, how to balance risk and potential benefits of research, and the importance of obtaining an informed, voluntary consent. I learned how important it is for researchers to ensure subjects confidentiality and privacy. Hardicre (2014) said that the research would be impossible without volunteers, and that the researchers “must act as patient advocates to ensure that every stage of the research

The study selected by this author centers around ethical and oversight issues concerning standard of care interventions received by participants in research studies. So as to address recently arisen concerns regarding key aspects of regulation and oversight of standard of care interventions executed during trials, the office for human research protections (OHRP) solicited comments from experts on what has been termed as “Draft Guidance” (Institute of Medicine [IOM], 2015, pp. 1-3).

By ensuring all research participants engage on a volunteer basis, we protect their autonomy and preserve the dignity of human life. During the medical experiments that were conducted during the holocaust, the prisoners or test subjects were thought of as disposable objects, of which the Nazi scientists had an unlimited amount. This contributed to the heartless, cruel nature of many of the experiments. By viewing prisoners as disposable test subjects, Nazi physicians conducted experiments founded on little to no empirical research. It has been suggested by many that the experiments themselves were conducted primarily as a form of extermination, and secondarily, as actual research. By ensuring that we provide our patients with informed consent, we are forced to have a “reverence for human life” (Shuster,

Civil rights lawsuit could be an issue if a nurse does not know the law enforcement law about the importance of informed consent from a patient. I have learned that obtaining informed consent before any procedure whether a hospital procedure or in conducting a research could prevent complications. In conducting a research, I should listen to the participants’ voices and closely pay attention to their emotions, feelings and rights as an individual in accordance with the variances in

Regard for autonomy is one of the essential guidelines of clinical ethics. Autonomy in a medical setting is not simply allowing patients to make their own decisions. For a Medical laboratory scientist, regard for autonomy involves respecting an individual’s entitlement to self-determination (Varelius, 2006) (Linehan et al., 2002). The principle of non-maleficence simply means that one should behave in a way that does not impose evil or do harm to others (Linehan et al., 2002). This principle can be defied with or without intent. Although no harm was intended when making the decision to reveal the test results, it could lead

A primary protection of the rights of clinical research subjects revolves around the concept respect for persons and the provision of informed consent (Belmont Report, 1979). Legal and ethical policies and guidelines enforce that research participants give informed consent prior to voluntary enrollment in a research study (Code of Federal Regulations,1999). However, the informed consent process presents some major challenges for study participants and

This paper will not only focus on the breach of ethical conduct of human experimentation but also introduce different views from Henry Beecher and Jay Katz about the ethics in human research. One of the human experimentation study that breach ethical conduct is the Tuskegee syphilis study, which was conducted in 1932 in Macon County, Alabama. Medical researcher recruited African American male subjects diagnosed with syphilis, they targeted people from poor and rural counties. The main purpose of the study was to acquire information about the natural history of untreated syphilis. The United States public health service “initiated a program to diagnose and treat 10, 000 African American for syphilis “1(pg 212). But unfortunately they didn’t have enough money for the treatments.

When one researches about the medical ethics in human experimentation, it is difficult to disregard the harsh realities of it. As Leonard Nimoy stated in his role as Spock in the movie, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few”. This is the cruel truth that be seen everywhere, but many people tend to ignore it since it is such a dreary thought. Many people, especially those in third world countries, are exploited every day. Large corporate companies come to typically poorer foreign nations, where there is a large gap between the rich and poor, to find cheaper workers. Many people in these foreigners tend to be desperate for money and immediately sign up for these jobs. Typical corporations would hire these people and make them work in inhumane working conditions such as long hours, less pay, and give no sanitation facilities. Although this happens on an everyday basis, there are very few people out there who challenge the large corporations. This example can also apply to medical ethics, sometimes a small amount of people have to suffer through experiments to help the general public. Although this is a morbid thought, it has been used in the past. During the mid-twentieth century, many American scientist believe that experimenting on a few people and making them suffer would create results that would be very beneficial to the general public. Today, most modern developed countries don’t believe in this ideology, but there are

Until the end of World War II, researchers established their own ethical standards and safeguards for human participants in their research. However, not all researchers were committed to the ethical treatment of human participants. The major impetus for a shift from individualized ethical guidelines was the uncovering of the brutal experiments performed on prisoners in Nazi concentration camps. A variety of sadistic “medical experiments” were conducted on unwilling participants. Some examples include breaking and re-breaking of bones (to see how many times they could be broken before healing failed to occur) and exposure to extremes of high altitude and freezing water (to see how long a person could survive). As a results of these atrocities

The pioneering spirit of research has answered countless questions, cured countless illnesses, and has prevented the loss of countless lives. Yet, although there is infinite potential in obtaining knowledge that could revolutionize the medical, social, and physiological world, research must not be conducted in a way that compromises the human subjects that are included in the study. For this discussion board, I will be discussing the case study “Bad Blood” while focusing on some of the ethical dilemmas that were involved in this specific case study.

     The Coalition of Americans for research Ethics states, "While we in no way dispute the fact that the ability to treat or heal suffering persons is a great good, we also recognize that not all methods of achieving a desired good are morally or legally justifiable. If this were not so, the medically accepted and legally required practices of informed consent and of seeking to do no harm to the patient could be ignored whenever some "greater good" seems achievable."

The article being analyzed looks at the lack of consent in medical experiments as an ethical violation. According to Arthur Caplan, who heads the division of medical ethics at New York University’s Langone Medical Center, “research without consent absolutely should be the last resort” (Ungar 2015). However, in some cases, the decision is not as clear-cut. For example, at the University of Pittsburgh, there is a study that is testing the practice of giving patients plasma to help their blood clot when they are being transported to the hospital. In many cases, such patients are unconscious and do not give consent, but the administration of plasma can help save their lives. One of the strategies being applied is giving non-willing participants medical bracelets that will communicate to doctors for them not to be enrolled for medical experiments (Ungar 2015).