C. Ben Mitchell, a professor of Moral Philosopher at the Union University, in his article, “On Human Bioenhancements” (200), argues against the use of human enhancement which has emerge questioning about, the principles of justice, and cultural complicity. Mitchell supports his argument by describing how this method is an unethical behavior by the medical community and how this new technology should not be implement anywhere in the future. His purpose is to persuade his readers not to support this new method which will have a negative effect within our society, and instead of helping our future generation it will destroy our human nature. The author’s audience likely consists of professors, college professors, parents, with some understanding
The code of ethics in which an individual abides by speaks volume. High ethical values are very important in every facet of life. Honesty, loyalty and trust worthiness make up the moral compass in which to live. This moral compass can often be blemished with the ugliness of immorality, deceit and greed. The Tuskegee Syphilis study and The Stanford Prison Experiment are experiments indicative of how research and an individual’s ethical values can become distorted.
I recently finished reading The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lack, a biography about Henrietta Lacks and how human tissue was taken without consent then used for medical research. Henrietta Lacks, was a colored woman, she was the daughter of a tobacco farmer, she came from a very poor, with very little education, she died from uremic poisoning, due to the treatment for cervical cancer October of 1951 at age 31. In January of 1951, Henrietta went to Johns Hopkins Hospital because she found a knot on her womb and was bleeding and had pain in her abdomen. Johns Hopkins is known for being the best research hospital around, but Henrietta did not go because
The topic and history of medical ethics has consistently been a strongly debated issue. With numerous case-specific situations concerning as well as qualifying the matter, perhaps one of the most influential and debatable stories may be that of Henrietta Lacks. With non consensual tissue samples taken, unauthorized distribution of her cells, and seemingly careless radiation treatment for cervical cancer, it might be fair to adjudicate that the lack of ethical practice was apparent and almost even fatal.
Death is an inevitable destination for living species. It is something we all have to face, to accept, and even to embrace. However, what if you are just waiting for death to come? Hooked up to countless machines, John Wallace wanted to speed up his process of dying. He is a 72-years-old man suffering from metastatic pancreatic cancer. Despite his treatment of palliative chemotherapy, his cancer has progressed. He suffers from little appetite, jaundice, constipation and abdominal pain and he takes countless narcotics. Yet, those treatments are not a permanent solution. The doctors have given him no chance of survival with their current abilities; death is imminent. Wallace developed a strong desire to die with dignity and without suffering. After careful consideration, Wallace discusses his desire for Physician-Assisted-Suicide (PAS) with his family and doctor. PAS is the voluntary termination of one’s own life by administration of a lethal substance with the direct or indirect assistance of a physician (CITE). However, PAS
“A Question of Ethics” by Jane Goodall and “Animal Research Saves Lives” by Heloisa Sabin presents two sides of the same coin in regards to Animal testing. Thereby, questioning the validity or necessity of animal research and testing today. In “A Question of Ethics” by Goodall she presents a scenery of the living conditions of the animals which are often isolated; posing the ultimate questions of, whether animal research is essential to medical research? Or How many tests are performed only to conform to laws and not out of scientific merit? The Suggestion was made that scientists should explore alternative options, such as testing on cell and tissue cultures. On the other hand, Sabin also puts forward an argument in support of animal testing, as her dear late husband Albert Sabin conducted many tests on animals whilst perfecting his vaccine against polio. The sacrifice of these animals has enabled entire generations of humans to grow up without fear of the crippling effects of polio. Animal rights advocates who see animal experimentation as cruel and wasteful overlook the fact that it has been instrumental in developing medicines that have saved countless human
When faced with an ethical problem or issue in any career affecting societal concerns, I would use moral reasoning and the knowledge about ethical principles I learned in my assignments and courses to make an informed and moral decision when presented with an issue. In my courses at Ashford, I learned a great deal about ethics in the SOC 120: Introduction to Ethics and Social Responsibility course. From the academic knowledge I’ve gained through this course, I am able to apply the four ethical principles, autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice, as guidelines when faced with clinical decisions working in the medical field. In SOC 120, I was able to learn and research how ethics applies to healthcare, health professionals, and hospitals, which is essential for my career in health informatics, and as a pharmacy
The human race has greatly benefitted through the use of animals. They have not only been a great form of companionship for people, but have also helped with the success in the world of medicine. For many years, the rights of animals and animal experimentation have been up for debate on whether or not it should be legal. Some may find that animal testing has led to major advancements in the medical world and that it is a small price to pay to save millions of lives, but others believe it is inhumane and that animals should be given the same rights as humans. Although the experimentation of animals has furthered medical knowledge, it should not be allowed because it is brutal and animals are unable to give their approval.
The concept of ethics entails systemizing, justifying, and recommending right and wrong conduct. It involves in practical reasoning: good, right, duty, obligation, virtue, freedom, rationality, and choice. Humanity has questioned this concept of ethics and ‘good’ for as long as it has survived, as it deals with real-life issues such as “what is morally right and wrong?” and “how do people ought to act?” Such ethical dilemmas can be found in people’s everyday lives, and although appears to be a straightforward question, there is much debate over which standard of behavior people should abide to when responding to certain situations, and determining what is morally right or wrong.
Specific Purpose: By the end of my speech, the audience will know about the problem of conducting experiments on animals and the ethical issue of the cruel treatment of animals by the researchers. While the problem of conducting experiments on animals draws attention of the society, the speech would present the limitation of animal experiments and outline the alternatives.
In James Rachels’s “What is Morality”, Rachels dissects the idea of a minimum conception and examines various moral dilemmas. His idea of minimum conception is not to narrow down morality, but to narrow down the aspects or “cores” of morality. Rachels believes that this can be used develop a universal morality that can apply to every situation. In second part of the article, Rachels presents three examples of real life moral dilemmas and two opposing views for each situation. This examples touch on the issue of euthanasia, but have different purposes and consequences. Rachels ends this article by addressing the importance reasoning and impartiality, which factors back in to the idea of minimum conception.
One of the furthermost essential issues in biomedical ethics is the controversy around abortion. There’s a long history on this controversy and it is still critically debated among researchers and the public in both terms of morality and legality. Some of the basic questions argued that may perhaps characterize the importance of the issue: Is abortion morally justifiable? Does the foetus/embryo/zygote have any moral and legal rights? Is the foetus a human being and, if so, should it be protected? What are the measures for being a human being? Is there any morally relevant break along the biological process of development from the unicellular zygote to birth? In this essay I will discuss why physician should recommend prenatal testing for severe birth defect even if it might encourages abortion therefore I do not agree with the statement above. My argument will based on the following ethical principles and theories: Utilitarianism, Respect for Autonomy and Virtue
Animal testing is a phrase that most people have heard but are perhaps still unsure of exactly what it involve. Whether it is called animal testing, experimentation or research, it should be defined as all testing methods on animals including, medical exploration, cosmetics, toxicology trialing, and psychological examination involving animal subjects. It is used to assess the safety and effectiveness of medications and beauty products as well as understanding how the human physiology works. While supporters believe it is necessary practice, those against animal testing believe that it involves torture and suffering to animals. Medical research is the hardest case of proposition in the debate whether animal testing should be banned or not, since it has previously yielded substantial benefits for humanity. Throughout moral, humanistic, and social perspectives animal testing is beneficial for medical evolution.