Essentially, everyone is in some state of vulnerability. However, some of us are more susceptible to harm due to our vulnerabilities. The susceptible are the individuals with the greatest risk. These individuals risk the loss of their autonomy, and maybe even their lives. Vulnerable populations can be found in every subset of society. However, as previously mentioned, there are some vulnerable populations that are at an even greater risk than others. Such populations may include; but are not limited to; sick individuals, the economically disadvantaged, women, children, and men from numerous disadvantaged backgrounds.
Vulnerable populations may at times be classified as the “them” in comparison to those who are less vulnerable (the “us”). This “us” versus “them” is an ideal that Bankoff makes clear in his article Vulnerability as a Western Discourse. The vulnerable populations that fall under the category of the “them” are the most vulnerable, the weak, and certainly the individuals that are exploited and dehumanized. Since the “us” are not as vulnerable they are the ones with the power, and privilege. In looking at this dichotomy, we can see how important it is to protect these seemingly subordinate vulnerable populations.
In medical research, there should be an extensive theoretical framework to guide the researcher to make ethical decisions. Due to the fact that vulnerable populations are preyed upon by researchers for means of medical research, and not necessarily for the benefit of the patient, bioethics has become a module that is to free the vulnerable individual from exploitation. It also, seeks to undertake one’s vulnerability while restoring autonomy as well.
Sick individuals are not only vulnerable merely because of ...
... middle of paper ...
...ncentives in a study can be known as a form of coercion.
When we realize that we are all a part of one human race, we can begin to define what equality looks like. Instead of trying to justify the exploitation of vulnerable populations, bioethics will seek to bring justice to the exploited and provide consequence for the unethical researcher. In recognizing the vulnerabilities of the exploited, we can conceptualize better ways to coordinate the ethical standards they should follow.
Works Cited
Flanigan, Rosemary. "Vulnerability and the Bioethics Movement." Bioethics Forum (n.d.): 13-16.
Klein, Joan Echtenkamp. Bad Blood: The Tuskegee Syphilis Study . 2009. 17 November 2011 .
Kottow and Michael H. The Vulnerable and The Susceptible. Article. Garsington Road: Blackwell Publishing , 2003.
The study was called Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male. The original study which was proposed for 9 months went on to 40 year study. Impoverished African American males were enrolled, patient’s informed consent was not obtained, and
Third world countries and underdeveloped nations have become the new proverbial Petri dish of experimentation and offer particular conditions which researchers would never be able to find in their home countries. This only serves to highlight the problem that inherently faces all research studies, the ethical debate in regards to the protection and rights of their subjects. Is it feasible to expect the same standards to apply in certain countries where an economical imbalance between what is possible and what is not can be the largest hurdle to overcome? These are key issues examined in the New England Journal of Medicine by author Marcia Angell, M.D., and co-authors Harold Varmus, M.D. and David Satcher, M.D. in their respective articles that consider the ethical standards that should prevail in such circumstances. Should researchers be upheld to universal standards, or are the standards more applicable in a “local” sense, where the conditions and the constraints of the location provide the context for how the principles should be applied?
According to the Belmont Report (1979), justice is relevant to the selection of subjects of research at two levels: the social and the individual. Skloot (2010) describes how “Gey took any cells he could get his hands on” and how “TeLinde began collecting samples from any woman who walked into Hopkins with cervical cancer” (p. 30). These two doctors did not exhibit fairness in their selection of subjects. Dr. TeLinde was collecting samples from women on the color ward and did not consider the appropriateness of placing further burdens on already burdened persons. The women whose tissue samples are being gathered for research are the women who will most likely be the last to benefit; because more advantaged populations (wealthy and white) will initially be the primary
The Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Untreated Male Negros made a distinct impact on the history of research. The study began in Mason County, Alabama in 1932 at the Tuskegee Institute. The goal was to learn about syphilis, and how the disease progressed with an emphasis on uneducated and illiterate African American males (Tuskegee University, n.d). There were 600 participants involved; 399 with documented cases of syphilis, and 201 control group members without syphilis (Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2013). Researchers informed the participants that they had “bad blood,” never informing them that they were infected with syphilis (Tuskegee University, n.d). To encourage the men to participate in the study they provided free medical care, transportation, meals on the days they were being examined, and burial insurance (Tuskegee University, n.d). When the study began no reliable treatments were available.
Many young citizens are unaware of a horrific act that lasted 40 years. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study has impacted society along with individuals related to the study for over 85 years. It caused a severe breaking of medical ethics, impacted the personal health of African Americans and their families related to the study, and created a stigma among African American people regarding medical care.
Many citizens are unaware of a dehumanizing act that lasted 40 years. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study has impacted society along with individuals related to the study for over 85 years. The study caused a severe breaking of medical ethics, impacted the personal health of African Americans and their families related to the study, and created a stigma among African American people regarding medical care.
The Tuskegee Syphilis experiment (The official name was Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male) began in the 1930’s. It was an experiment on African Americans to study syphilis and how it affected the body and killed its victims done by Tuskegee Institute U.S. Public Health Service researchers. The initial purpose of the Syphilis study “was to record the natural history of syphilis in Blacks” (Tuskegee University, “About the USPHS Syphilis Study,” par. 2). The study was necessary because syphilis was a disease that didn’t yet have an official cure (when the study began in the 30’s). There were 600 men in all; 399 had syphilis and 201 served as a control group for the experiment. The subjects lacked money and education to understand what exactly was going on and couldn’t give informed consent ,but “the researchers offered incentives: free physical exams, hot meals, and rides into town on clinic days, plus fifty-dollar burial stipends for their families when the men died” (50). Therefore, they didn’t question the doctors about what they were doing. During the experiment on the hundreds of African Americans, the doctors found out that they could cure them with penicillin. However, the doctors choose not to cure them in order to study how syphilis killed people and many of the subjects had, indeed, died. Later, in the 1970’s, an article was released which sparked rumors about the southern doctors injecting the men with syphilis, rather them already having it. The government put an end to the study in the early 1970’s. The experiment affected medical history because it helped lead to the creation of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical an...
It is a multidimensional human condition and constant human experience with the reduced ability to protect oneself (Cousley, Martin, & Hoy, 2014). Bailey (2010) describes vulnerability as an internal conflict which brings feelings of hopelessness, helplessness and lack of control. Vulnerability as defined by Scanlon & Lee (2006) can be broken into three dimensions, physical, social, and psychological aspects. Physical vulnerability can be identified by the potential risk of harm in the environment. Social vulnerability include age, sex, and ethnicity. Psychological vulnerability refers to the feelings associated with the loss of control and can be manifested by stress and anxiety. Vulnerability can be measured by the potential harm and the capacity to overcome it, as stated by Spiers (2000). Only the person experiencing vulnerability can truly understand its implications as it is a unique and individualized experience. (Thorup, Rundqvist, Roberts & Delmar, 2012). Vulnerability can be better understood by examining the external and internal risk factors that increase an individual’s
The book, Bad Blood: The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, by James H. Jones, was one of the most influential books in today’s society. The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment study began in 1932 and was terminated in 1972. This book reflects the history of African Americans in the mistrust of the health care system. According to Colin A. Palmer, “James H. Jones disturbing, but enlightening Bad Blood details an appalling instance of scientific deception. This dispassionate book discusses the Tuskegee experiment, when a group of physicians used poor black men as the subjects in a study of the effects of untreated syphilis on the human body”(1982, p. 229). In addition, the author mentioned several indications of discrimination, prejudice,
Vulnerability is commonly defined as an individual being weak and susceptible to harm. The definition of vulnerability in nursing is slightly different. Vulnerability in nursing is focused on a population or group of people, not the individual person. These groups of people can have limited access to care and may have a higher risk of being ill or having certain health conditions. A population that is generally considered vulnerable are individuals with mental disabilities. The Medical Dictionary for the Health Professions and Nursing, defines mental disability as, “any clinically significant behavioral or psychological syndrome characterized by distressing syndromes, significant impairment of functioning, or significantly increased risk
...r lives were like. They found that 86% of the resilient children seemed to doing well as adults and compared with non-vulnerable children had a higher rate of reporting to be happy. However, they did record high amount of health problems such as dizziness, back problems for men and pregnancy, childbirth for women. In addition, other children from the vulnerable group reported significantly better results compared to their teenage selves e.g. going back to school, getting a job etc. the study proves to show that children can grow up to be competent members of the society even if born into impoverished environment and under stressful situations as long as there is a balance between the environment, stress and support. she suggest early intervention programs and nurturing environments for children in vulnerable conditions to improve the child’s development in future.
Steinbock, Bonnie, Alex J. London, and John D. Arras. "’Rights- Based’ Approaches." Ethical Issues in Modern Medicine. Contemporary Readings in Bioethics. 8th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2013. 23. Print.
In 1987, there was a Syphilis outbreak in a small town Alabama, Tuskegee. Ms. Evers went to seek out African Males that had this disease and did not. They were seeking treatment for this disease, but then the government ran out of money and the only way they can get treatment if they studied. They named this project “The Tuskegee Study of African American Man with Syphilis”, so they can find out where it originated and what will it do to them if go untreated for several months.
Peter Singer, an author and philosophy professor, “argues that because animals have nervous systems and can suffer just as much as humans can, it is wrong for humans to use animals for research, food, or clothing” (Singer 17). Do animals have any rights? Is animal experimentation ethical? These are questions many struggle with day in and day out in the ongoing battle surrounding the controversial topic of animal research and testing, known as vivisection. Throughout centuries, medical research has been conducted on animals.
20 Feb. 2014. Nardo, Don. A. Biomedical Ethics.