“Consent, an issue for the Patient”
In 1951, Henrietta Lacks’ cells were taken without her knowledge and to this day are still being used , she never got any type of recognition for that either both financially and publicly . Giving permission to doctors to do what they want with your body is a big debate today . Some people believe that there is no need for doctors to ask , and others think if somebody has something the world needs there is no such thing as permission . These people also believe that your body should be at the full disposal of the doctors . If it is your body you should be the only person in charge of what happens to it . The doctors shouldn’t be able to make decisions for you just because of the simple
…show more content…
Indeed, a patient should definitely have to give permission for doctors to do any action on their bodies because this will give them the rights and power they deserve . There are many reasons why a patient should be in control of their bodies , including the fact that they will be able to control what happens to them and be fully aware of the doctor’s intentions. For example in text 1 ( The Immortal life of Henrietta Lacks by Rebecca Skloot ) it can be shown what could happen to you if you are not aware of what the doctors are doing to you . In the text it describes a story of a woman who got her cells basically stolen and later revealed to be immortal because of their self regenerative abilities . Not only are these cells still being used today but her family has gotten no type of pay or contribution for it . This shows exactly how doctors can behave and how it doesn’t hurt to be more aware of their actions . This also comes back to consent, because if Henrietta Lacks had given consent and understood exactly what she was giving consent for there would be no book written about her . Henrietta Lacks would have still died but at least the life changing trait she had that the …show more content…
Text 2 (Morality, Religion and Experimenting on You) suggests that the way consent forms are given now is not fair . Doctors should make sure the patient understands because committing actions on somebody blind to those same actions is unethical. This is an aspect of how you should be fully aware of what you are giving consent to and how giving permission is important . The text implies that, “Informed consent forms are now often 40 pages , crammed with scientific and legalistic jargon that most patients don’t understand .” This helps support the idea that even if the patient did have to give consent they still don’t really give it because they don’t fully know what their giving consent to . This type of consent today is at most unfair, how is someone supposed to understand an endless amount of material that they know nothing about . Who is going to even read those 40 pages ? Most people will just sign and not go through the hassle of understanding , and the doctors should keep that in mind when asking the patient for permission . There are some that also say that the patient should understand and it’s their problem if they don’t. This point is easily unrealistic , because it is suggesting what basic knowledge of every person should have, which reveals that it’s more opinion than
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
Henrietta Lacks did not know that a tissue sample had been taken from her cervix, but the turning point in medical ethics was when researchers started injecting patients with cancer cells without their consent, so they could see how cancer spreads. After that, the government institutionalized medical review boards and informed consent laws. By law, informed consent means that the patient knows that the study involves research, the purpose of the research, the duration of their participation, procedure,
Dr. TeLinde was also incredibly deceitful, he had a habit of using women patients suffering from cervical cancer for his research without first gaining their consent. So when Henrietta walked into his office colored, uneducated and suffering cervical cancer, he took full advantage. She was told to sign a form of consent before getting her first procedure of radiation. Signing this form also meant she was handing over her right to deny the doctor from collecting her specimen
While, Rebecca Skloot endured ten years of writing her book The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, which included a lot of research along with many trials. Skloot visited many scientific labs, hospitals, and mental institutions which included many different types of people from many different places, with many different backgrounds; including nobel laureates, grocery store cashiers, convicted felons, and a professional con artist. While Skloot was gathering research pertaining to Henrietta’s family, she was accused of making facts up and lying about the information she was compiling. She was both physically and mentally slammed for the story she was trying to document and the information she was trying to gather to do so.
The book lays bare the painful history, what can be called as disquieting in present ethical views, on how tissue samples were obtained without consent and how the family was kept in the dark about HeLa cells for many years since Lacks’ death in 1951, which evoked questions and issues on privacy and ethics in the practice of medical and scientific research. Even so, during the that time it was not considered unethical to obtain living tissue samples from a patient without consent or to provide unauthorized medical
Throughout the process of getting the information, the author was accused of getting all the information for money. The family thought she was being paid to gather all the information about Henrietta. From what I have read
According to Merriam-Webster dictionary, consent is defined as “a formal agreement that a patient signs to give permission for a medical procedure (such as surgery) after having been told about the risks, benefits, etc,” (Webster). During the time that Lacks was hospitalized, informed consent was not really practiced in the medical field. “In 1951, the cells of Henrietta Lacks were taken without her consent,” (Stumps 127). Because she was not informed of the usage of her cells, this practice was extremely unethical. Doctors were aware of this clause but because it was not used widespread, most tended to overlook it and use different organs and cells in the name of research.
During the 1960s patients were often untold they were being used for research. “Like many doctors of this era TeLinde often used patients from the public wards for research without their knowledge.” (Skloot, 2010, p. 29). The doctors believed that since the patients were being treated for free they had the right to use them as subjects in research. However in today’s society while informed consent is a common practice there are still injustices where patient’s samples are being bought and sold without their knowledge.
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?
The origination of HeLa cells, used in biomedical research for a potential cure for cancer, had made many ground breaking discoveries in science; all thanks to one woman, Mrs. Henrietta Lacks. The history of Mrs. Lacks’s contribution to these studies raised many ethical issues concerning healthcare practice. In the short film, The Way of All Flesh, we learn how these cells were revealed by direct violation of ethical principles. During the 1950s, matters regarding informed consent practices were in their beginning stages of implementation.
Atul Gawande in his article “Whose body is it, anyway?” introduced couple of cases, which discussed a controversial topic, doctors dealing with patients and making important medical decisions. These are difficult decisions in which people might have life or death choices. Who should make the important decisions, patients or doctors? Patients don’t usually know what is better for their health and while making their decisions, they might ignore or don’t know the possible side effects and consequences of these decisions.
An essential part of modern society relied on trust, especially the trust of doctors and scientists. People had the right to make an informed decision about their bodies and body parts. People had a right to their body parts, both attached and cell samples collected by doctors. The actions that the medical professions made will continue to affect future generations in both positive and negative ways. In the contemporary biographical novel, the Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, Rebecca Skloot used logical opinions to argue about the importance of consent to reveal the lack of morality from those in the medical field which continues to persist today.
Informed consent. A.2.b. Types of information needed. A.4.a. Avoiding harm.
Consent is patients’ rights because they have right to know what is happening to their life which is fundamental value in professional practice (Department of Health (DH), 2001). Dougherty and Lister (2015) state that consent is a patient’s rights to refuse or to accept a treatment. However, Dimond (2010) said that consent is a voluntarily decision which can be given orally, verbally, written or implied for example if you ask a patient to take their blood pressure and they offer their arm. Eyal (2012) also states that consent promote trust in medical procedures that people may seek and comply with medical advice and participate in medical research. Bok (2013) argues that there are problems with the trust-promoting as many patients give consent despite being to some extent distrustful.
Patients have a right to complain about the doctor's refusal to the Management. Provision of Treatment requires patient’s choice and informed consent. Even if a patient has signed a general consent clause, the patient can still refuse medical treatment or procedures. However, in exceptional or emergency situations a doctor may be legally justified in performing surgery or providing treatment without the patient's consent. The patient should be competent and capable of making such a decision to give a consent.