Was the Doctors’ Experiment on Charlie Ethical?
Though at first glance, many would say increasing one’s intelligence temporarily only to send him back to ignorance combined with a new urge to try to return to intellect with no avail is obviously unethical, but it is an incorrect assumption. The short story “Flowers for Algernon” by Daniel Keyes focuses on Charlie, a 35 year old man with an IQ of 68 as his intelligence is tripled due to an operation. The book focuses on how his perception of the world and his personality are completely changed as he moves forward on his journey to intelligence and his fear as he realizes it is only temporary and its loss is inevitable. Though many say the operation was not ethical to Charles, in reality there
…show more content…
For example, after he became smart, Charlie overhears the two scientists fighting over credit for the project, and Dr. Strauss says “someday thousands of neuro-surgeons might be using his technique all over the world” (Keyes 9). Since thousands of surgeons could be changing people’s lives and increasing their intelligence thricefold, it was worth the risk to experiment on Charlie because their discovery could have changed the entire world, speeding our advancement in technology and other aspects of life. On the other hand, as for the risk, even though the intelligence was only temporary, Charlie is able to publish a paper on the “Algernon-Gordon Effect,” stating “artificially increased intelligence deteriorates at a rate of time directly roportional to the quantity of the increase,” and feels his effect, “in itself, is an important discovery” (Keyes 15). Clearly, Charlie makes his mark on the world and helps contribute to greater scientific knowledge in ways he never could without the boosted intelligence. Though he ends up the same as he started, he is proud of his discovery and is able to look at himself as equal, if not above those around him. Evidently, the benefits of the experiment outweighed the risks because Charlie was able to contribute to science, and the experiment, if successful, could have changed the
To make this guideline ethical, “any risks must be balanced by the benefits to subjects, and/or the important new knowledge society will gain. The riskier the research study, the more benefit it must offer to be considered ethical. As a part of this, the risks and burdens should be as low as possible.” (Emanuel et al. p.5 ¶8). This means that the chance of having a benefit must be more than a chance of a risk to be treated ethical. Charlie acquired a higher chance of death than receiving the benefit, violating the rule of Favorable Risk-Benefit Ratio. “Algernon died two days ago.” (Keyes June 10, ¶1). Even though Algernon was the first test subject to receive the experiment, Charlie was the first human to obtain the experiment. Since Algernon died, there could be a chance that Charlie could also perish because of the experiment. In the story, there was a more chance of a risk than benefit, making it unfair. In addition, Charlie figured about what had happened and what had gone wrong. “The unforeseen development, which I have taken the liberty of calling the Algernon-Gordon Effect, is the logical extension of the entire intelligence speed-up. The hypothesis here proven may be described simply in the following terms: Artificially increased intelligence deteriorates at a rate of time directly proportional to the quantity of the increase.” (Keyes June 5, ¶5).
Is becoming smart always better than staying dumb? After considering Charlie’s situation, I have decided that the answer to this question is no. Charlie is the main character in the science fiction story Flowers for Algernon written by Daniel Keyes. In the book, Charlie is a 37 year old man who has an I.Q. of 68 and is on a mission to become smart. When the opportunity comes for him to participate in an experiment for an operation that can triple his I.Q., he willingly takes it. It turns out that the operation only grants a temporary intelligence boost, and Charlie experiences high intelligence only to have it start deteriorating. I think that Charlie was wrong to have the operation that temporarily made him smart.
Everyone knows that every story has two sides, but the tricky part is figuring out which side to believe. In the short story “Flowers for Algernon” by Daniel Keys, Charlie Gordon, a 37-year-old man with a mental handicap, has an operation performed on him to artificially increase his intelligence. Before and after the operation, there were drastic changes in the lives of Charlie and all those around him. While the operation caused many twists and turns for Charlie and his peers, the pros far outweighed the cons.
This required discussion that is regulated by the Nuremberg Code. In Flowers for Algernon the two doctors do not know exactly how to perform the procedure. The doctors also did not tell Charlie the effects that would later happen to him. It is an amazing idea to get your intelligence increased but it is not proven that it works, so it would be very dangerous. Increasing intelligence should not be performed until it is clear what the effects are and it needs to be safe. If the operation does work very successfully on the patient, the patient could do very sufficient things like building a car, curing cancer, or any disease. If the operation works successfully on you, you might tell or share the idea with your peers and they might want to have the operation performed too. They might go and get the operation performed and something may happen to them. The end of the operation could be misleading, as well as fatal. The operation is also not worth all of the money you paid if it isn’t permanent and only lasts for a few months, or does not turn out
Every day, people go through operations and sometimes experience unpredicted and unwanted outcomes. The story, Flowers for Algernon, is exactly like that. In this story, a 37 year old man, named Charlie Gordon, has a mental disability and participates in an operation/experiment to increase his knowledge. After taking part in the operation, Charlie’s intellect gradually escalates to a genius status. Charlie, the man who had an IQ of 68, was slowly maturing mentally and he started seeing the world with a whole new different perspective. However, near the end of the story, his brain regresses back to where he started from. Charlie shouldn't have taken part in the operation: he started seeing the world in a different perspective, he experienced unpredicted outcomes, and the operation changed Charlie's whole personality. Charlie would have been better off if he didn’t undergo the operation and participate in the experiment.
They failed to see Charlie as a human being, not a test subject. They also weren't acting ethically when they chose Charlie as the test subject, when he was not mentally capable of making such a decision to say yes to the experiment. Although Charlie's doctors were unethical when they performed the experiment on Charlie, they were going into an unknown field of study where no known procedures were in place with patient interaction and concern. All in all, Charlie Gordans' doctors did not act ethically when they performed the experimental surgery to improve his intelligence.
The scientists finally decide Charlie is the perfect subject for the experiment due to his motivation and his eagerness to be smart. As Charlie's IQ begins to grow, so does his ability to understand how cruel the world around him really is. While Charlie's knowledge grows, his attitude changes along with those around him. Charlie loses his job, friends, happiness, and even his willingness to care or learn. On the contrary, Charlie also experiences and learns a lot from this experiment.
...ss cannot be deprived from increased intelligence, particularly without emotional maturity. Throughout the beginning of the Novel all Charlie Gordon wants in life is to become smarter so which will in turn make him happier and help him gain more friends. Not even fame or worldwide recognition could overcome his will to become happier from intelligence. However as the book progressed and Charlie did receive his wish to become smarter he realized, without emotional maturity he was even worse off than before which then may have caused his relapse and loss of memory bringing Charlie back to his previous condition. Expecting to be happy from the respect from other people by being intelligent is neither reasonable nor logical. Happiness needs to be derived from within, and cannot be won from other people, and those who believe it can are not yet emotionally stable.
Charlie?s experiment was temporary, and overtime his IQ regressed. Algernon, a mouse that went through the same surgery as Charlie, died. If Charlie?s hypothesis proves correct, then he will die as well. Charlie?s life was better before the experiment because he was not exposed to the risks and consequences of the surgery. Without the experiment, Charlie would still be living his ignorant but happy life.
Scientific experimentation shows a destructive nature of man through stereotypes. Stereotypes are cruel and heartless. “He makes the same mistakes as the others when they look at a feeble-minded person and laugh because they don’t understand there are human feelings involved. He doesn’t realise I was a person before I came here.” (Keyes, 145) Before the surgery Charlie was looked down upon because of his mental state. However, after the surgery he is treated like he was made by the scientists, as though he was their very own ‘Frankenstein’. This is a destructive nature of man because after the surgery Charlie finds out that his so called friends have been making fun of him his whole life. Stereotypes show a destructive nature of man. “People with mental illness are depicted as burdens to society and incapable of contributing in positive ways to their communities.” (Edney) Through this book the reader knows this statement is false, because Charlie is able to function fairly well in society, considering he has a job and he is doing very well there. Stereotypes show a destructive nature of man because they belittle people and make them feel worthless.
In this novel, Flowers for Algernon, written by Daniel Keyes, a man named Charlie Gordon has an operation done to increase his intelligence. He started as a mentally retarded man and slowly became a genius. He seemed to soak up information like a sponge and he was able to figure out the most complex scientific formulas. The only problem with the operation is that it does not last for ever and in his remaining time he tries to figure out why it is not permanent. He will eventually lose everything he learned and become worse off than when he started, so Charlie was better off before he had the operation.
You are risking the life of Charlie Gordon in order to triple his intelligence. Charlie should not undergo this procedure. Charlie has needs that need to be taken care of, but I do not think that this procedure is needed. This operation is such a drastic change for Charlie, it would not be good for him. Some may say that Charlie should do the operation, as it will give him more opportunities in life. However, when equality is maintained, nobody can be treated to suit their needs. Is that what we want for Charlie? His needs are far more different than those around him, and even if he says he wants to be treated equally, I don’t think that he actually wants that. Even he says and believes that when he is treated to suit his needs he is in a better
Many people in our society today change themselves to feel accepted by others. When in reality, they do not need to change themselves to be accepted. If one takes that chance, undesirable consequences can be a result. Losing crucial relationships, losing self esteem, and maybe even depression. In order for one to be happy, one must accept themselves for who they are. As George Orwell once said; “ Happiness can only exist in acceptance.” In the story, “ Flowers for Algernon,” written by Daniel Keyes, Charlie Gordon should not have gotten the operation to increase his Intelligence Quotient (IQ) because, it damaged his relationships, it damaged his self esteem, and it had life threatening symptoms.
...o walks to direct his steps.” King James Version 2000. Victor proved this true, he had no ability to rectify the costly mistakes namely the deaths of his closest friends and family. Scientists today seek knowledge of things outside the predefined laws of nature. Have they truly considered the consequences of their successes now and future? Is there any way to truly know for sure the benefits versus the risks? Time will tell.
Charlie worked at a factory and saved the factory ten thousand dollars of work and made the products more efficient. He changed the way the machines are set up in the factory that saves them thousands of dollars and required less work. Charlie understood the concept of the factories and was able to make improvements. The operation was supposed to increase Charlie’s IQ and that is what he was hoping would happen. Charlie’s spelling and grammar improves throughout his progress reports and his IQ dramatically improved from a sixty-eight to two hundred. Charlie wanted to become smart and improve his English after the surgery and that is exactly what happened. Charlie is so fascinated with how the procedure on the brain worked that he wanted to improve the way they did the intelligence surgery. Charlie then discovered new knowledge of the function and the increase of human intelligence. Charlie's wisdom was so high, he was able to uncover important discoveries of the complex human mind. The procedure affected Charlie and increased his skills and brilliance.