Henrietta Lacks
A hefty payment in the name of science
Topic: What is the duty of a medical doctor/researcher to inform his/her subjects on the implications of their medical consent? Historically, how does social justice play a role in this relationship?
Are doctors allowed to act unethically if their immoral research and inhumane actions are for the benefit of society? Is informed medical consent necessary if the lack of it does no harm to the patient? Does skin color correlate to medical bias? Doctors have taken a Hippocratic Oath since the dawn of medicine which implies they are to act ethically as the healers of mankind; the reason why there is a large amount of trust placed by patients in their physicians. The concept of informed consent is relatively …show more content…
Henrietta lacks, a 31 year old black woman who passed away from cervical cancer in Baltimore's Johns Hopkins hospital. Her life was nothing but ordinary at the time yet she went on to be one of the most important people in our history. Henrietta was responsible for the development of numerous vaccines, treatments, careers, significant advancement of medical knowledge, and wealth for others. Howard Jones, her doctor, had sent tissue samples of her carcinoma to Dr.Gey for unrelated testing for an experiment he was conducting without consent. Dr.Gey had been in search for cells that would grow and multiply inside a lab, outside of the body in hopes to find a cure for cancer; he had been taking samples from all his patients without consent in his pursuit. Her cells were taken and sold for large profits, as HeLa, without her and her family’s knowledge while she was being treated and then by deception post mortem. In the book it is mentioned that her identity is kept hidden by Dr.Gey for her safety and patient information confidentiality even though it was not law; publication of her name could have caused nuisance to the hospital. As a result she failed to get recognition in the field of medicine. Upon the discovery of her cells twenty-five years later after her death her family was in disbelief; her husband, David Lacks, “had not signed any paper.” The Lacks received no financial benefit as the HeLa line made millions of dollars. They were unaware of the fact that genetic testing had been done on them and published; also didn’t have the means to contact a lawyer. As a matter of fact a similar case in the name of John Moore v. Regents of the University of California was in trial for the same reasons. Dr.Golde chose to not get consent and used deception to obtain and then develop and patent the Mo cell line which is estimated to be worth three billion
Topic: What is the duty of a medical doctor/researcher to inform his/her subjects on the implications of their medical consent? Historically, how does social justice play a role in this relationship?
Are doctors allowed to act unethically if their immoral research and inhumane actions are for the benefit of society? Is informed medical consent necessary if the lack of it does no harm to the patient? Does skin color correlate to medical bias? Doctors have taken a Hippocratic Oath since the dawn of medicine which implies they are to act ethically as the healers of mankind; the reason why there is a large amount of trust placed by patients in their physicians. The concept of informed consent is relatively …show more content…
Henrietta lacks, a 31 year old black woman who passed away from cervical cancer in Baltimore's Johns Hopkins hospital. Her life was nothing but ordinary at the time yet she went on to be one of the most important people in our history. Henrietta was responsible for the development of numerous vaccines, treatments, careers, significant advancement of medical knowledge, and wealth for others. Howard Jones, her doctor, had sent tissue samples of her carcinoma to Dr.Gey for unrelated testing for an experiment he was conducting without consent. Dr.Gey had been in search for cells that would grow and multiply inside a lab, outside of the body in hopes to find a cure for cancer; he had been taking samples from all his patients without consent in his pursuit. Her cells were taken and sold for large profits, as HeLa, without her and her family’s knowledge while she was being treated and then by deception post mortem. In the book it is mentioned that her identity is kept hidden by Dr.Gey for her safety and patient information confidentiality even though it was not law; publication of her name could have caused nuisance to the hospital. As a result she failed to get recognition in the field of medicine. Upon the discovery of her cells twenty-five years later after her death her family was in disbelief; her husband, David Lacks, “had not signed any paper.” The Lacks received no financial benefit as the HeLa line made millions of dollars. They were unaware of the fact that genetic testing had been done on them and published; also didn’t have the means to contact a lawyer. As a matter of fact a similar case in the name of John Moore v. Regents of the University of California was in trial for the same reasons. Dr.Golde chose to not get consent and used deception to obtain and then develop and patent the Mo cell line which is estimated to be worth three billion