How Is Flowers For Algernon Ethical

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

was a maximized benefit and minimized risk, the methods used were valid, and Charlie was fully informed to the best of the researchers’ abilities.
Firstly, the possible benefits outweighed the risks in the experiment because the gain was maximized and temporariness was still a smaller risk than the benefits.

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

world.
Secondly, the methods used in the experiment were valid and realistic. The tests had already been successful on animals, able to increase their intelligence so much they could beat Charlie, low as his IQ was. As Charlie saw it, “Algernon beats me all the time because he had that operashun [operation] too” (Keyes 4). Evidently, the methods used were valid because they had already been tested, successfully, proved because Charlie was beaten by the mouse. Additionally, since the tests had been done with outstanding success on animals, the experiment therefore had a realistic goal which was actually possible, and did not waste resources on useless topics. Obviously, the methods in the experiment were valid and realistic because they demonstrated success in earlier animal test subjects.
Finally, though some say charlie was not informed before he had his operation and could not possibly have given informed consent, in reality, charlie was fully informed to the best of the researchers’ abilities and felt informed enough to make his own decision on whether to have the operation. For example, though others argue Charlie did not know what could have happened after the test and had no idea when he realized it was temporary, the researchers, in reality, had already given him a warning about how artificial intelligence could have been temporary. Charlie himself tells us the researchers told him “it will probly be tempirery” (Keyes 2). Charlie already knows there was a possibility it would be temporary, so it was not the researchers’ faults for not telling him, since it was his own choice not to back out. Not only did he already know about the temporariness of the intelligence, it was his choice to join the experiment and his choice to go through the operation. Some argue it was not informed consent because, as Charlie finds out, “Miss Kinnian told [the researchers] that I was her bestist pupil in the adult nite school” (Keyes 1). On the other hand, though Charlie is originally volunteered by Miss Kinnian, when she told him “they dont know if it will be perminint but theirs a chance. Thats why I said ok even when I was scared because she said it was an operashun” (Keyes 2), because he wanted the second chance so much he was willing to risk everything. Contrary to what some readers may argue, Charlie was informed when he consented to the operation. Though he may not have understood things fully, he was still told everything about the experiment and made his own decision to not go for help and agree individually.
In conclusion, contrary to popular belief the experimenting on Charlie was a completely ethical process. The risks of the experiment mainly included temporariness and possible loss of intelligence afterwards, but these were minimal and negated by the maximized benefit of a world-changing artificial intelligence enhancement by triples, giving Charlie possibly his only chance to help benefit the whole world in his own way, which he never could have done without his intelligence boost. Also, the methods used were valid due to prior testing on animals. Finally, Charlie was fully informed to the best of the researchers’ knowledge about the temporariness of the experiment, and Charlie made his own decision based on the information provided to him.