Ethics and Controversies in Medical Experimentation

Patients should have the ability in all situations to decide what happens to their bodies. This should be accompanied by the knowledge of risks associated with any particular procedure. Some physicians may attempt to circumvent this right for personal gain by omitting important information or simply utilizing force. This is where the debate over human experimentation arises. In a more civil setting, some patients don’t have the cognitive capacity to choose what is done with their tissues. In this case, the line of ethics becomes obscure. What justifies a physician experimenting on another human being? Some researchers believe it is racial superiority. At the time that African Americans were viewed as lesser as whites, some institutions were

The Nazis practiced eugenics, or the science dealing with factors that influence the hereditary qualities of a race and with ways of improving these qualities, especially by modifying the fertility of different categories of people. They euthanized German citizens whose lives were “not worth living.” Euthanasia was propagandized to the German public via posters, movies, and public education. For example, students were required to solve mathematical equations that compared the costs of living between a healthy child and one that was disabled. The Nazis used the German public’s minds against them, making them believe that those who were inferior did not need to live. This meant that researchers could get consent very easily. The subjects were not informed. Their rights were circumvented with malicious intent. These people were brainwashed to the point that some were volunteering for “mercy killings.” “Ultimately, 200,000 German adults were euthanized or granted “mercy killings” (Rubenfeld 2). Had there been a powerful enough force to enforce it, informed consent could serve as a blockade to these atrocities. The infamy of Nazi researchers will serve as a lesson to why informed consent is