Cameron Quick
Putman
Hour 2 & 6
15 November 2016
Argument Paper
Ethics is a topic that is argued about a lot in today's modern society. Ethics are the bases of standards of what is right and wrong that tell what humans should or shouldn't do. In the story "Flowers For Algernon", Charlie Gordon is a mentally disabled thirty seven year-old man who has difficulty learning and comprehending. Two doctors decide to offer a surgery to Charlie that could change his life forever. The experimental surgery would supposedly help his intelligence level. Charlie Gordons' doctors did not act ethically when they performed the experiment to improve his intelligence.
The doctors did not act ethically when they failed to really treat Charlie like a human being,
…show more content…
Although Charlie was a thirty seven year-old man, his understanding and comprehension of a situation was far too low to understand such consequences that the surgery could come with. In the article, "Five Steps to Better Ethical Decision Making", it says to ask yourself if you could understand making that choice (Dobrin). The doctors in "Flowers for Algernon" did not ask themselves if they were lacking as much intelligence as Charlie, could they make the choice to have the surgery? Charlie didn't know what could happen to him if the there were side effects until it was too late. Therefore, the doctors did not act ethically when choosing Charlie as the test …show more content…
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.
Siegler, M., and W. Winslade. "Ethics in Medicine." Clinical Ethics. By A. R. Jonsen. 7th ed. N.p.:
McGraw-Hill, 2010. N. pag. Print.
Dobrin, Arthur, D.S.W. "Five Steps to Better Ethical Decision Making." Psychology Today. Sussex
Publishers, LLC, 13 July 2012. Web. 10 Nov. 2016
Lasagna, Louis. "Guides: Bioethics: Hippocratic Oath, Modern Version." Hippocratic Oath,
Modern Version. John Hopkins University, 27 Sept. 2016. Web. 10 Nov.
I Dr. Strauss, chose Charlie for the surgery, it got me a lot of grief from Dr.Nemur but I knew it was the right choice. Charlie is a man of low intellect but he is very cooperate, motivated, and not hostile. These traits are exceptionally rare in a man of 68 IQ. Another reason that Dr. Nemur and I chose Charlie was that he worked extremely hard in Miss Kinnians class. Working hard got him to be the best because he picked up spelling and writing faster than others in the class. Some other reasons I chose Charlie was because he did all the tests without much complaint. We almost lost Charlie when he tested against Algernon in the maze and didn't write the progress reports for 2 weeks. When the tests were to
Some people might say that the doctors didn’t act ethically with Charlies surgery. That might be true in some cases but in this case it is not. Charlies doctors acted ethically when they said they would use Charlie as a test. Charlie probably didn’t know what it meant to be used as a test subject but he was fine with it. Charlies doctors
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.
the doctors did not make an ethical diction they did not but Charlies safety first. they simply wanted a convenient test subject for their surgery. On question doctors are supposed to ask themselves before starting is "in sum, how can this patient
When Charlie agrees to have the experimental procedure performed on him, he does not have enough intelligence to make a decision that is properly thought through. Charlie is unable to comprehend the unintended consequences of the procedure. Hearing that he will be used
From these two texts, it is evident that Dr. Strauss and Dr. Nemur rushed too quickly into the surgery when it came to testing on a human because of their own personal gain and selfish reasons--and in doing so-- ruined Charlie’s life. The two doctors should have discussed testing the surgery on Charlie with other professionals and waited until Algernon died to see the full side effects of the surgery-- instead of testing on a human before the mouse has lived out his full life. If they would have done so--and have taken the guidance they would have been given-- they would have witnessed the strange behavior that Algernon exhibited on May 23 before they would have tested on Charlie. The doctors would have recognized the side-effects of the surgery, would not have tested on Charlie, and he would have remained the way he was at the beginning of the story-- innocent, optimistic, and persistent. We know from reading the end of the story, where Charlie loses all of the intelligence he gained, that Dr. Nemur and Dr. Strauss do not succeed, therefore proving that true success requires guidance from others-- guidance that the two neurosurgeons did not
Medical ethics could be so many different thing mostly bad.There's so many stories about medical ethics this this story about this girl. At the age of 13 she was diagnosed with a rare and fated type of cancer.The survived and was cleaned that didn't have cancer. Then 10 years later she fought for her life again, she had sergey. After the Surgery there was no where no sign of the cancer. There years later she married and she became pregnant because of her health history she went to a clinic so they could watch her pregnancy.She had to go back to the clinic for having a lung tumor. She want to be in the best health, surgery was not an option. Her baby was too small to be born yet ,” meaning too premature.” (Thornton )She wanted to keep treating her cancer but, the doctors said that should wait until 28 weeks.She waited and the doctors she it was too dangerous and they wouldn’t help.So they want to cort.The court made it distion and at time is was very ill. The court order a surguy but the doctor said that if she goes into surgery she might not make it. She refused, but the doctors could not refused the courts orders. She was rolled into the surgery room. she made it into through the surgery, but two days later she died. She ...
The doctors weren't ethical when performing the surgery. Charlie was not very smart and he wanted to do the experiment to get smarter. But Charlie didn't know what he was getting himself into and the doctors never told him the side effects. After the surgery, the effects don’t fully kick in right away. Charlie wanted to test it out right away, but
Flowers for Algernon is a science fiction novel/short story written by Daniel Keyes. It is about a man named Charlie Gordon. In it, Charlie is chosen by two scientists to participate in an operation to make Charlie smarter. Charlie has an IQ of 68, and goes to a night school for mentally retarded adults. If the operation works, Charlie's IQ will triple. At the lab, Charlie is prepared for the operation. But did the doctors act ethically or not? Truly, they did not act ethically.
My first reason that Charlie was right to have the surgery is that he got to teach life lessons to a lot of people and he probably changed some people’s lives. At the beginning of the story Charlie thinks that he has a couple of friends names Joe and Frank. Joe and Frank make fun of and bully Charlie but he does not know. After the surgery charlie comes to realize that his “friends” aren’t really his friends. Through this
Charlie should not have had the operation because he was poorly uninformed about what he faces by committing to the surgery. The doctors are supposed to give
Firstly, in Flowers for Algernon, Professor Nemur and Dr. Strauss make the decision to operate on Charlie solely with the possibility of boosting their reputation with fame and wealth. This is demonstrated during the scientists’ speech when they suggest Charlie was a subhuman before the operation, boosting their credibility on the fact that they gave him his wealth of knowledge entirely. When Charlie rebels at the Chicago convention, Strauss and Nemur’s dreams are crushed as they came so close to presenting their creation to the world, only fall short of the recognition and riches they could have obtained. Next, Charlie obliges to the operation to transform his reputation from an incompetent adult to an average man. His only dream was to be included in conversations at the bakery and talk politics, religion, and etcetera with his colleagues. Charlie’s feelings are exhibited when he reveals his desire not to be relegated to the flour sacks with his comic book, instead he would like to be included in the conversations of his co-workers. The possibility of finally being normal for once in his life inspires Charlie to agree to the operation. Finally, in Awakenings, Dr. Sayer is influenced to put a patient on the experimental drug, L-Dopa, to prove his worthiness and place in the hospital. During his early experiments with the catatonic patients, the senior doctors scoffed at his empty theories with no scientific evidence to support them. A representation of this situation is Dr. Sayer’s ball experiment where the patients supposedly steal the will to move from the ball. To conclude, when a person’s reputation is on the line, they can be compelled to make a decision to heighten their standing in the societal
McGee, Glenn and Arthur L. Caplan. "Medical Ethics." Microsoft® Encarta® 98 Encyclopedia. © 1993-1997: Microsoft Corporation. CD-ROM.
Garrett, T. M., Baillie, H. W., & Garrett, R. M. (2010). Health care ethics: Principles and problems (5thed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Charlie’s decision to go through with the surgery let him experience new things. He shows that he has gone through new experiences through the line, “What makes it awkward is that I have never experienced anything like this before” (Keyes 78). Charlie is a low-functioning adult, so that means he cannot do a lot of things by himself. He was always wondering what it felt like to talk to an intelligent human, and comprehend the words that people would say. No one wants to live their life always wondering what it is like to do, or feel something. Normal people feel