Arguments Against Henrietta Lacks

1587 Words4 Pages

There is a saying, usually associated with acts of war. This saying is “the ends justify the means,” which means although bad things may be done to reach an end goal, the end goal may be so good that the means of reaching it are justifiable. But do the ends truly justify the means in all cases? This is something that can be debated in the story of a loving mother who lost her life while battling cervical cancer. Her name was Henrietta Lacks. Her doctor, without her true knowledge, took her cells. While Henrietta sadly died, those extracted cells lived on, continuing to split, and grow. The ethical debate is whether it was right for her doctor to extract, and sell, Henrietta’s cells without her true knowledge. The debates cover sub topics such as the doctor’s choice to extract and sell the cells, Henrietta’s lack of knowledge, Henrietta’s families …show more content…

Once the Lacks family found out, they were none too happy. They were “angry—angry that Henrietta’s cells were being sold for twenty-five dollars a vial” and their anger was justified. “Hopkins say they gave them cells away,” Lawrence yelled, “but they made millions! It’s not fair! She’s the most important person in the world and her family living in poverty. If our mother so important to science, why can’t we get health insurance?” Henrietta’s family’s lack of compensation is one of the unethical portions of this story. It’s possible, if the Lacks family was given compensation for their loved ones cells, this whole ordeal would be justifiable. But because the Lacks family is not living in a mansion on a hill with a large settlement, this is still up for debate. Henrietta’s family lives in poverty, while there loved one is one of the most important people to have ever lived. This is one of the stronger, pathos driven arguments against the ethics of this

Open Document