Purpose Of The Tuskegee Syphilis Study

Bioethics research studies are defined as studies that focus on the ethics and philosophical implications in medicine (Dictionary). The Tuskegee Syphilis Study is a prime example of a bioethical research that was ongoing from 1932 until 1972 at the Tuskegee Institute in Macon, Alabama. The United States Public Health Services (USPHS) and the Tuskegee Institute were responsible for carrying out the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. The sole purpose of the study was to monitor the effects syphilis has on the human body when allowed to go untreated. In the 21st century, an array of ethical, moral, and legal issues are identifiable within how The Tuskegee Study was conducted. The Tuskegee Study included six hundred participants of interest

In 1927, the state of Alabama passed a law that required the reporting and treatment of venereal diseases (QQQ). The USPHS clearly violated this law by not reporting or treating the infected participants. One ethical approach the Tuskegee Syphilis Study violated was the Declaration of Helsinki of 1964. The Declaration of Helsinki addressed the wrongfulness of research by using human subjects, including research on identifiable human material and data (WMA). In the Tuskegee Study, the participants were wrongfully used as human subjects for forty years by being withheld curative treatment. Secondly, the physicians violated the International Code of Ethics throughout the entire Tuskegee Study. The International Code of Ethics states physicians are responsible for promoting the health, well-being, and rights of patients (WMA). Once Penicillin was found to cure syphilis, the physicians willingly allowed the participants to go untreated. As participants of the Tuskegee Study, they legally had the right to receive the curative treatment but did not. Additionally, the International Code of Ethics includes individuals who are involved in medical research. In the Tuskegee Study, the participants were never told they had syphilis and were purposefully withheld from receiving curative treatment. Additionally, the participants were coerced and did not consent to the conditions being carried out by

The Belmont Report is now a required read for all participants involved in human research (ZZZ). The Belmont Report addresses three ethical principles for human research participants. One ethical principle is respect for the person. Respect for the person requires medical researchers to obtain informed consent from study participants. Additionally, the participants must be given accurate information about their circumstances and treatment options so they are allowed to decide what happens to them(ZZZ). A second ethical principle addressed is beneficence. The Belmont Report defines beneficence as all test subjects involved in research must be informed of all risk and benefits of treatment in which they agree to undergo (ZZZ). Thirdly, the ethical principle of justice is addressed in the Belmont Report. Justice includes individual justice and societal justice. The Belmont Report states individuals justice means the doctor or researcher are not allowed to administer potentially helpful treatments to a favored class while offering much riskier to others (ZZ). The societal justice maintains research participants are selected randomly and fairly and without consideration of the individuals social, gender, and economic class (ZZZ). The Belmont Report is one way the government aims to protect research