Henrietta Lacks Informed Consent

The basic building blocks for all living things are cells. Most cells cannot be seen by the human eye, but they play a massive role in life because they make up tissue, which develops into an organism (What Is a Cell?). These organisms include humans and humans study cells in order to fix physical damage done to the human body and create cures for diseases, and disabilities (Why Cell Biology is So Important?). Therefore, cell research provides medical benefits, but it also creates a rising dilemma occurring presently in medical science, where a patient’s cells are being taken without his or her consent. This problem is further discussed in both the articles “Deal Done over HeLa Cell Cine” by Ewen Callaway and “Taking the Least of You” by Rebecca Skloot. Although both, Skloot and Callaway, assert that patients must receive an informed consent, Callaway’s argument is based …show more content…
A similarity between both the articles is that their cases share the concept of arguing to keep a patient informed. The Henrietta Lacks case presented in Callaway’s article shows the effect of Henrietta Lacks not receiving an informed consent when the Lacks family has their mother/grandmothers cells taken without any permission from her or her family (132). In a similar fashion, the John Moore case in Skloot’s article shows the lack of information Moore received as his doctor used his cells for monetary value. Both the Lack’s and Moore’s case have the negative outcome where cell researchers have caused both groups to suffer losses in finances and information gathering. However, unlike Callaway, Skloot also uses Ted Slavin’s case to show that when a patient receives an informed consent they are able to make money for themselves and also voluntarily help researchers gain cell resources for study (Skloot