Rebecca Skloot’s book, “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks”, combines investigative reporting and scientific research to expose the race, gender, socioeconomic status, and bioethical issues regarding HeLa cells. As the story unfolds, Henrietta Lacks, a poor black women, seeks treatment in 1951 for gynecological issues at Johns Hopkins Hospital. As A result, a few days later she receives the diagnosis of epidermoid carcinoma of the cervix, stage I. Not long after, Henrietta had her first cancer treatment at Johns Hopkins. During the procedure, tissue from her tumor and healthy cervix cells were collected unbeknownst to Henrietta and her family without consent. These cells were then given to the head of tissue culture at Johns Hopkins,
…show more content…
In the first place, the doctors felt it was okay for them to steal part of her body for research because Henrietta was a poor, uneducated, black woman. In fact, “many scientists believed that since patients were treated for free in the public wards, it was fair to use them as research subjects as a form of payment” (p. 30). The doctors violated the justice principle of ethics by not treat poor blacks in the same way they treated whites and those of higher socioeconomic statuses. For instance, Howard Jones, Henrietta’s gynecologist is quoted as saying, “Hopkins with its large indigent black population, had no dearth of clinical material” (p. 30). As a consequence, Johns Hopkins did not operate in a fair, just, and impartial …show more content…
The consequence of taking the cells without permission, treating the less fortunate as research subjects, and not acting in fairness would be considered the right action to take because the of the outcome. On the contrary, applying the Care theory to this situation would result in the opposite conclusion. According to the Care theory, the doctors had a duty to treat Henrietta as they would like to be treated. Their lack of caring, fairness, and non- maleficence contradicts the foundation of this ethical theory. Specifically, Henrietta was denied the right to a voice in the decision of being a donor. The next ethical issue to be discussed is the coercion of Day, Henrietta’s husband, by doctors at Johns Hopkins. After Henrietta’s death, “ the way Day remembers it , someone frim Hopkins called to tell him Henrietta died, and to ask permission for an autopsy, and Day said no” (p.89). Later that day, Day went to Hopkins and the doctors again asked permission to do an autopsy pursing this further, they told Day “they wanted to run tests that might help his children someday” (p.90). Feeling pressure from the doctors and his cousin, Day relented and gave his permission. The doctors disregarded Day’s self-determination by strong arming him into giving
In the first place, the doctors felt it was okay for them to steal part of her body for research because Henrietta was a poor, uneducated, black woman. In fact, “many scientists believed that since patients were treated for free in the public wards, it was fair to use them as research subjects as a form of payment” (p. 30). The doctors violated the justice principle of ethics by not treat poor blacks in the same way they treated whites and those of higher socioeconomic statuses. For instance, Howard Jones, Henrietta’s gynecologist is quoted as saying, “Hopkins with its large indigent black population, had no dearth of clinical material” (p. 30). As a consequence, Johns Hopkins did not operate in a fair, just, and impartial …show more content…
The consequence of taking the cells without permission, treating the less fortunate as research subjects, and not acting in fairness would be considered the right action to take because the of the outcome. On the contrary, applying the Care theory to this situation would result in the opposite conclusion. According to the Care theory, the doctors had a duty to treat Henrietta as they would like to be treated. Their lack of caring, fairness, and non- maleficence contradicts the foundation of this ethical theory. Specifically, Henrietta was denied the right to a voice in the decision of being a donor. The next ethical issue to be discussed is the coercion of Day, Henrietta’s husband, by doctors at Johns Hopkins. After Henrietta’s death, “ the way Day remembers it , someone frim Hopkins called to tell him Henrietta died, and to ask permission for an autopsy, and Day said no” (p.89). Later that day, Day went to Hopkins and the doctors again asked permission to do an autopsy pursing this further, they told Day “they wanted to run tests that might help his children someday” (p.90). Feeling pressure from the doctors and his cousin, Day relented and gave his permission. The doctors disregarded Day’s self-determination by strong arming him into giving