People who had other underlying health problems made it difficult to identify symptoms of SARS because it made it hard to differentiate (CDC, 2013). 3. Scientists believed the newly infected individuals produced quality specimen and it was impossible to detect the microbe once the infected individual started to recover. Scientists wanted to compare patients blood antibody test from early in their illness to the end of their illness in which they found that
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).
Moral code and medical ethics are an essential theme throughout “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks,” especially concerning the distinction between the right and wrong decisions that were made during the period after Henrietta’s death. Many of the journalists, and some of the doctors and medical researchers lacked the moral code to let Henrietta and her family know of their findings of the HeLa cell, which lead to significantly changing the code of ethics in medicine. Since Henrietta was dead, many researchers and doctors were unaware they were still breaking her confidentiality, and the Lacks family’s confidentiality also becomes an afterthought. Rebecca Skloot says, “It wasn’t illegal for a journalist to publish medical information given
The immortal life of Henrietta Lacks has raised ethical issues in the exploration of the origin of HeLa and also the struggles that her siblings faced. These cells are the basis for the discoveries of important scientific studies. If she had been in charge of the tissues that had been removed from her and had been declined them to be used in studies, none of these studies would have been possible. The novel raises many ethical issues and on how science is handled today. We should be able to control what happens to our tissues, the consequences, and benefits of donating tissues to science, should be something we have in thought in the day of age in healthcare and science.
When Henrietta’s case is revealed to people, their first response is usually: “Wasn’t it illegal for doctors to take Henrietta’s cells without her knowledge and consent? Don’t doctors have to tell you when they use your cells in research?” Well...no. At least, not in the 1950s to the early 21st century. People are often confused on how they should feel about this situation, which is understandable. Scientists aren’t after your legs and organs, they’re just using tissue scraps you parted with voluntarily.
Clearly, taking Henrietta 's cells without permission from the family is a success for science, but it also causes psychological and mental anguish for her family. Day, Henrietta 's husband, simply agreed to whatever the doctor said to him and never had the education to understand the "doctor talk." He simply trusts that a doctor will do the right thing and knows best. He is never given the opportunity to provide informed consent regarding his wife and her body. "Debate about the implementation of informed consent is constricted and polarized, centering on the right of individuals to be fully informed and to freely choose versus and autocratic, paternalistic practice that negates individual choice" (Corrigan 768).
Despite the progress in medicine, doctors from the early 20th century and later neglected the rights of their patients and simply focused on research. Carrels work with the Nazis and the Jewish doctors refusal to work with Southam as a result of the Nuremberg Trials serve to strengthen Skloot’s point. While some doctors sought to be ethical in their work and uphold the guidelines for cell ethics, as a whole the standards are not upheld. This too ties back to the stories of Mo and HeLa, where their cells were taken and used in these unethical manners that Skloot so detests, and they are woven together in such a way that each story lends a historical basis to the next. In her writing, Skloot provides the details of the lack of cell ethics present in early cell research and makes evident the lack of growth in that part of the field.
I just thought they might make some interesting color for the scientific story.” (211) gold never wanted the consent form the lacks family. He only wanted to make his story more interesting by spreading the life of Henrietta all around for anyone to see. When he did try to contact the lacks family he did not even try, he tried one number for them knowing they probably did not have a phone. When gold tells skloot that he “thinks” he contacted then that really shows that he didn’t care if he got the families consent. The lacks family was not looked as the family of Henrietta, but just a source to help with his
In summary, Charlie Gordon 's doctors were not ethical because they did not follow the Hippocratic Oath or ask themselves the necessary ethical questions doctors must ask themselves. They acted foolishly and because of that, they hurt Charlie in the long run. Possibly, if Dr. Nemur and Dr. Strauss gave him all the information, Charlie wouldn 't have agreed to the operation and wouldn’t have had to go through the pain of losing everything. He couldn 't make a good choice based on the information
However, it is often forgotten that the organization serves a variety of medical conditions. By defunding Planned Parenthood the American society will suffer by denying those who are below the federal property lines to treat their problems, that are not relating to abortion. Planned Parenthood’s patients are not only women, and as stated before, abortion services only make up 3% of Planned Parenthood’s treatments. Also, by denying proper funding to Planned Parenthood, those who may have contracted an STI/STD are unable to get treatment due to the inability to pay for advanced technology that is required. Overall, by defunding Planned Parenthood the government is denying a large number of people the right to get medical treatment for their conditions because of conservative
Over the years, there have been many controversial issues surrounding medical research, but one of the most arguable topics of all time is the use of embryonic stem cells. Some individuals believe that extracting stem cells from unborn babies will be useful to create new medications or, in most cases, help regenerate damaged cells. Although, many people disagree with the process scientists use to obtain these stem cells. By continuing embryonic stem cell research, scientists are denying an unborn child the chance to live, they are not letting nature take its intended course, and they are not adhering to the religious or moral beliefs of many people. For these reasons, embryonic stem cell research should be discouraged.
There are others in the medical field on the extreme end feel that laws should be developed that couples with known genes that cause genetic disorders must not have children or if they do selection of embryos are done (Munson, 2014). Genetic testing is expensive and not all insurance cover specialized testing and many cannot afford out-of-pocket cost. Other issues considered is that if a child is born with a genetic disorder or illness, what strain could the lifelong treatment required by the child put on the finances of the family, their insurance, or would the child qualify for state and/or federal medical benefits. Advocates for genetic testing due to the increasing cost and strain on the health care system, the amount of money spent on tests to diagnosis or treat is much cheaper than that of money spent on the care of a child with disabilities (Munson, 2012). Considerations in regards to the future of an infant born with a genetic disease or illness with regards to issues as personal image, self-esteem, and the
Another moral and ethical issue brought on by the doctors of John Hopkins was when they retrieved tissue from Henrietta’s cervix without consent. Tissue that was later cultured and became the miraculous HeLa cells. Neither Henrietta nor her family gave their written or verbal consent for her cells to be used in Dr. Gey’s research. Later in the book, Skloot introduces her readers to a similar case of a man named John Moore. Moore also had tissue stolen from his body without consent that was later developed into a successful cell line.
Lack 's family provided the sample, and it helped researchers to investigate the HeLa cell more in- depth. However, researchers broke the promise, and did not contact to the family about the result of the cancer test. although HeLa cell greatly contributed in biology, it left some problems. the first was if it is okay to take anyone 's sample without permission and to use it in a research. it is avoided in nowadays, but it was not in the past.
Many people have been brainwashed to think that the only method to keep their children safe and healthy is to get them vaccinated at a hospital. But what they do not know is that most of those dangerous diseases have already been gone for a very long time. And the pharmaceutical companies that are telling them to get their children vaccinated are simply lying to them in order to keep them coming back with the fear that their children will get sick if they do not get their vaccinations. Which leads me to say that parents should have the choice to decide whether or not their children get vaccinations. The pharmaceutical companies like the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) which is responsible for protecting the public health by assuring that