Henrietta Lacks was an African-American woman whose cells from her cancerous tumor led to many medical advances in the world. The cells led to the HeLa line, which have a crucial role in drug development and toxicity testing (Hunt). Prior to the HeLa line, it was proven impossible to grow human cells in a laboratory for any length of time. The conflict in this amazing discovery is that her cells were taken from her body for medical purposes without her permission. People argue that people have to be given legal ownership of their tissues and given money for them or medical advances made using the tissues. The Supreme Court ruled that people cannot be given money for the use of their tissues, because it would dissuade researchers from using …show more content…
This is a result of racism, which is essentially the only reason why the Lacks family were not given money for the use of their family member’s tissue. “...careless journalists and researchers who violated the family’s privacy by publishing everything from Henrietta 's medical records to the family’s genetic information,” (Skloot). Not only were the cells taken without Lacks’ permission, but the medical records of the family were published without the family’s consent. None of the publishers view this as a violation of privacy, most likely because the race of the family. “‘Scientists don’t like to think of HeLa cells as being little bits of Henrietta because it’s much easier to do science when you dissociate your materials from the people they come from,”’ (Skloot). The scientists dissociate the materials from the family not only so that they do not have to give money to the family of the donor, but also because the fact that amazing medical discoveries would have never been discovered if not for an African American woman’s cells, Henrietta Lacks. The only time when white people call the Lacks house is when they want something to do with the HeLa cells (Skloot). These facts are proof that the Lacks family weren’t paid for the use Henrietta’s cells because of their
Patients have no rights to samples taken from them as they become biological waste. Yet it is not necessary for doctors to obtain consent to store the same tissues that are supposed to be biological waste and use the samples for research. The lines in bioethics are blurred and there should be stricter guidelines on how research should be conducted and exactly who should benefit from. I believe the tissue donor should receive some sort of compensation because it not for said cells, the research would not exist. As with HeLa cells, without Henrietta Lacks, there would be no HeLa cells nor any
The article “The End of the Henrietta Lacks Saga?” From the Smithsonian magazine was written by Rachel Nuwer in 2013. The Smithsonian is a magazine from the museum in Washington, D.C. Authors should use critical thinking when writing magazine articles, but some do not. Nuwer successfully informed readers about Lacks and what happened 1950 until now.
During class one day the topic of Henrietta Lacks and her immortal cells, also known as HeLa cells.. The teacher told her class about how her cells where immortal but, couldn’t provide any other information. Skloot did further research but, couldn’t find anything. She didn’t understand why more information about Lacks’ wasn’t known even though her cells made amazing
So, when they went to institutions for treatment they were often just seen as things that the doctors and scientists could tinker with. Skloot writes a bit on the Tuskegee syphilis study, which lead to white doctors abusing their patients for “research” and to later state “the news spread like pox spread through the black communities: doctors were doing research on black people lying to them, and watching them die (50). Skloot stated that when Henrietta went in for her cancer treatment, the doctor preforming the treatment did not even tell, nor ask her if she wanted to be a donor of cells, instead he just cut the samples from her cervix and sent them off (33). Had she been a white female going through the same treatment, the protocol would definitely have been different, the doctors would have gotten consent from the patient before doing anything of that nature. All of this adds together to show how Henrietta was objectified for the use of
When Henrietta Lacks died of cervical cancer in 1951, she left her five children motherless and alone. This includes one of her two daughters, Deborah Lacks. Throughout her life, Deborah never was able to meet her mother and knew of her only as an idea- a woman who died soon after her birth. After Henrietta’s death, she faded into old news and was hardly ever talked about. Deborah only ever wanted to learn more about her mother, going as far as harassing her brother, Lawrence, until he broke down into tears.
While the general terrain covered by Skloot has already been charted (by Washington and other journalists), the signal accomplishment of The Immortal Life is its excavation of hospital and medical records on Henrietta Lacks and its exhaustive interviews with her surviving family members. Skloot braids that compelling stream into a fluid accounting of the nascent history of cell research in America, creating in the end a riveting narrative that is wholly original. In short, we learn the stunning news that in 1951, Henrietta Lacks, a poor, undereducated 31-year-old black woman from a small Virginia outpost, unwittingly “donated” cancerous cells that eventually spawned a molecular cottage industry—and aided hundreds of breakthroughs in scientific
“In 1999, president Clinton’s National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) issued a report saying that federal oversight of tissue research is “inadequate” and “ambiguous”. It recommended specific changes that would ensure patients’ rights to control how their tissues were being used.” (page 327). Unfortunately, the changes were never made and scientists still have the ability to conduct research on one’s tissues without consent. The reason for why the changes were nullified remain unknown even to Wayne Grody an individual “who was in thick of the debate in the nineties, (for) why the congressional recommendations and NBAC report seemed to have vanished.”.
Henrietta Lacks’s daughter Deborah once stated “If our mother cells done so much for medicine, how come her family can’t afford to see no doctors?” (Skloot 9). The lack of ethics also points to another theme of Henrietta’s story, discoveries are more than the discovery itself, there are always people behind them. Deborah’s words also emphasize the human side
Is it right for one's life to be manipulated for the use of scientific research or is it just a evasion on the person's privacy. Henrietta Lacks was a African American with cells that intrigued many people, she was diagnosed with cancer leaving her to be cared for at her local hospital, where she would later die due to the extremity of the illness. While at the hospital she was unaware that the doctors there were experimenting on her taking cell samples from her body, to help find a resolution to multiple diseases. The people who examined Henrietta manipulated her and the rest of her family to gain information on her cellular structure to be ahead of others looking to achieve the same objective. Henrietta Lacks cells should have never been evaluated because it's an evasion of her freedom, a danger to her personal health, and cause conflicts.
“Fetal Tissue Fallout, R. Alta Charo, J.D., September 3, 2015” In this article R. Alta Charo states that we have a right to use fetal tissue for research and therapy (Fetal Tissue, 1) The article goes into how a lot of people find this to be a moral issue and a matter of the conscience and explains how the antiabortion activist that don’t agree with the research are actually benefitting from the fetal tissue. They argue that the research supports abortions but have taken part in receiving vaccines and therapy that comes from the research. R. Alta Charo begins by talking about the argument over the antiabortionist activist who pretended to be a research company representative and gave out false, edited information from a Planned Parenthood video that goes over the services they provide.
She does this to show why the scientists involved acted the way they did for HeLa cells and why the Lack’s family was constantly being taken advantage of, even after Henrietta’s death. For example, George Gey, the scientist who immortalized HeLa cells, described himself as “ the world’s most famous vulture, feeding on human specimens almost constantly” (30). This small snippet of information already establishes Gey as a man who will do whatever it takes to further science. The audience will be better able to understand why scientists like Gey would take advantage of patients like Henrietta, and use her cells without her knowledge or consent. By also, characterizing the Lack’s family Skloot highlights why people like Henrietta’s family were easy targets for scientific experiments.
Participation Portfolio 1 Asst 3: Henrietta Lacks Discussion Questions Please answers each of the following questions, and be prepared to discuss in class 1. Please outline the history of Henrietta Lacks 's tissue cells. Who did what with the cells, when, where and for what purpose? Who benefited, scientifically, medically, and monetarily?
Despite the wrongdoings Henrietta Lacks was put through her cells did a lot to help advance science. Her cells helped develop different types of vaccines, which such as her daughter faced. A lot of good and bad came out of Henrietta’s
The final violation of ethical principles, in the story of Henrietta Lacks, was the violation of justice. Without the contribution of Henrietta’s cells, many discoveries and vaccines, such as the vaccine that conquered Polio, would not have made their pivotal breakthroughs in biomedical research. Her direct and unknowingly, supportive contribution helped save many people’s lives all over the world. Unfortunately, her named did not receive the recognition it deserved, and her family never received any compensation for profits made from direct use of her
Throughout the article “Organ Sales Will Save Lives”, her thesis statement is clear. Joanne believes that people should be allowed to donate their kidneys even if people believe that it is “morally wrong.” Throughout her entire article she restates her opinion that people should be able to sell kidney’s without consequences. In the article, she states why people believe that it shouldn’t be legal as well as people who do believe that it should be legal. Most people believe that it shouldn’t be legal for one reason, that it is morally wrong.