The Tuskegee Syphilis Study was originally conceived in 1929 by the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) as a method of determining the predominance of syphilis within black communities across America and of identifying a mass treatment.
…show more content…
However, how and why it took place when it did must be closely analyzed to determine why it was unethical and to prevent it from reoccurring in the future. According to Allan M. Brandt, the study “revealed more about the pathology of racism than it did about the pathology of syphilis; more about the nature of scientific enquiry than the nature of the disease process.” At the time when the study began, racism was still very prominent throughout the United States, especially in the South. As such, the fact that doctors believed black people to be different and react in a dissimilar fashion to diseases in comparison to white people did not create uproar; instead, it was widely accepted in the medical sector. However, the ethical issues concerning this case go far and beyond the racist nature of the population at the time. The first dilemma is the fact that the nearly 600 subjects involved in the study were not privy to all of the information available. Secondly, the participants did not give their informed consent. Thirdly, the subjects were discriminated against based on age, sex, and race. Lastly, the subjects were not treated with penicillin upon its discovery and were prevented from seeking out treatment elsewhere. Furthermore, Brandt affirms that because the physicians who were observing the men believed that performing autopsies was the only way to “scientifically confirm the findings of the …show more content…
However, the individuals who were recruited by the USPHS were not privy to all of the information and were taken advantage of due to their lack of education and poor economic status. Furthermore, even after penicillin was found to be an effective cure, patients were withheld from treatment. According to the Belmont Report, a document that came about in 1978 notably as a result of the Tuskegee study,
If a physician proceeds in his interaction with a patient to bring what he considers to be the best available techniques and technology to bear on the problems of that patient with the intent of doing the most possible good for that patient, this may be considered the pure practice of medicine.
In addition, the report published by the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research affirms that experimental and treatment programs represent two distinct fields of biomedical research and they should only be conducted if the benefits outweigh the risks. In this case, the USPHS demonstrated a complete disregard for the participants’ well-being and the risks far outweighed the benefits. The USPHS should have put an end to the study and supplied the subjects with
However, how and why it took place when it did must be closely analyzed to determine why it was unethical and to prevent it from reoccurring in the future. According to Allan M. Brandt, the study “revealed more about the pathology of racism than it did about the pathology of syphilis; more about the nature of scientific enquiry than the nature of the disease process.” At the time when the study began, racism was still very prominent throughout the United States, especially in the South. As such, the fact that doctors believed black people to be different and react in a dissimilar fashion to diseases in comparison to white people did not create uproar; instead, it was widely accepted in the medical sector. However, the ethical issues concerning this case go far and beyond the racist nature of the population at the time. The first dilemma is the fact that the nearly 600 subjects involved in the study were not privy to all of the information available. Secondly, the participants did not give their informed consent. Thirdly, the subjects were discriminated against based on age, sex, and race. Lastly, the subjects were not treated with penicillin upon its discovery and were prevented from seeking out treatment elsewhere. Furthermore, Brandt affirms that because the physicians who were observing the men believed that performing autopsies was the only way to “scientifically confirm the findings of the …show more content…
However, the individuals who were recruited by the USPHS were not privy to all of the information and were taken advantage of due to their lack of education and poor economic status. Furthermore, even after penicillin was found to be an effective cure, patients were withheld from treatment. According to the Belmont Report, a document that came about in 1978 notably as a result of the Tuskegee study,
If a physician proceeds in his interaction with a patient to bring what he considers to be the best available techniques and technology to bear on the problems of that patient with the intent of doing the most possible good for that patient, this may be considered the pure practice of medicine.
In addition, the report published by the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research affirms that experimental and treatment programs represent two distinct fields of biomedical research and they should only be conducted if the benefits outweigh the risks. In this case, the USPHS demonstrated a complete disregard for the participants’ well-being and the risks far outweighed the benefits. The USPHS should have put an end to the study and supplied the subjects with