Researchers Should Have Informed Consent In The Immortal Life Of Henrietta Lacks

Patients have no rights to samples taken from them as they become biological waste. Yet it is not necessary for doctors to obtain consent to store the same tissues that are supposed to be biological waste and use the samples for research. The lines in bioethics are blurred and there should be stricter guidelines on how research should be conducted and exactly who should benefit from. I believe the tissue donor should receive some sort of compensation because it not for said cells, the research would not exist. As with HeLa cells, without Henrietta Lacks, there would be no HeLa cells nor any

Henrietta Lacks did not know that a tissue sample had been taken from her cervix, but the turning point in medical ethics was when researchers started injecting patients with cancer cells without their consent, so they could see how cancer spreads. After that, the government institutionalized medical review boards and informed consent laws. By law, informed consent means that the patient knows that the study involves research, the purpose of the research, the duration of their participation, procedure,

“As a member of this profession, a physician must recognize responsibility to patients first and foremost, as well as to society, to other health professionals, and to self,” (“Principles of Medical Ethics”). These learned principles include compassion towards patients, respect, and equality involving health care. The treatment provided to Henrietta Lacks for her cancer was compassionless, the respect shown to the Lacks family after Henrietta’s death as they continued to distribute her cells was far from respectful, and the John Hopkins hospital, Henrietta’s hospital was not in the practice of equality at the time of this

Later, when Henrietta’s genome was published, it sparked up more drama, because this too was unethical. “That is private family information,” said Jeri Lacks-Whye, Lacks’s granddaughter. “It shouldn’t have been published without our consent” (The NY Times). I believe that the continued use of the HeLa cells would have been ethical if the scientists were given permission. “It was a big moment, a hopeful moment, sitting down with the family and bringing so many years of research without consent to an end” (NBC News).

However, individual have a right to ask the researcher any questions they may have; they also have a right to contact the IRB. Like I stated earlier changes are wonderful and sometimes in life something bad/unethical has to happen to someone as in the story about Henrietta’s Lacks for changes to come about. Although it took more than 60 years to fully acknowledge the origin and history of Henrietta’s cells, it is reassuring to see that efforts are now being made to ensure that her family’s best interest remains at the forefront of future research. (Martinez,

We need to be able to understand what the nature of the procedure is and what it details. It’s also good to discuss other types of alternatives. Informed consents can also bring up certain topics about the risk that can be involved with the procedure. As healthcare professionals it is part of our job to help look after the patient and make sure that all legal documents are in order.

Jasmine Poole The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks by Rebecca Skloot is about a women who has cervical cancer that went to the doctor to get better. But instead of just getting better, the doctors took a sample of the cancer cells. The doctor used her cells to help other people with the same cancer get better. In this case, Henrietta and her family didn’t know that her cells were being sold all around the world to reporters/doctors.

Part two of, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, once again submerges the reader in to the world of HeLa cells. This section emphasizes what occurred with Henrietta’s immortal cells after her death. Along with the many medical discoveries made from these miracle cells, part two delves into the physical and emotional abuse that Henrietta’s children were forced to live with after her passing all while struggling financially while their mother’s cells are being sold for millions of dollars. Skloot continues her phenomenal synopsis of the life of Henrietta Lacks and the stories her cells continue to tell. One of the utmost riveting and critical scenes of this section occurs in the first few pages.

Informed consent must never be assumed. On the other side of the spectrum, informed refusal is the patient's right to deny any of the services recommended. From a legal standpoint, it is important to always document informed consent and refusal to avoid any legal

For instance, the practitioners are obligated to constantly inform the participants about plans that pertains to interventions (Reamer, 1987). In addition, it is essential for informed consent to include the following: “What is done, the reasons for doing it, clients must be capable of providing consent, they must have the right to refuse or withdraw consent, and their decisions must be based on adequate information” (Kirk & Wakefield, 1997, p. 275). One of the most dehumanizing incidents that occur is the researchers prohibit the participants’ self-determination. For example, the men were compliant with receiving treatment and to be examined by the physicians.

   Should patient consent be required to store and distribute their tissue for research? Should doctors disclose their financial interests? Would this make any difference in achieving fairness? Or is this not a matter of fairness or an ethical issue to begin with?

The origination of HeLa cells, used in biomedical research for a potential cure for cancer, had made many ground breaking discoveries in science; all thanks to one woman, Mrs. Henrietta Lacks. The history of Mrs. Lacks’s contribution to these studies raised many ethical issues concerning healthcare practice. In the short film, The Way of All Flesh, we learn how these cells were revealed by direct violation of ethical principles. During the 1950s, matters regarding informed consent practices were in their beginning stages of implementation.

Informed consent. A.2.b. Types of information needed. A.4.a. Avoiding harm.

Consent is patients’ rights because they have right to know what is happening to their life which is fundamental value in professional practice (Department of Health (DH), 2001). Dougherty and Lister (2015) state that consent is a patient’s rights to refuse or to accept a treatment. However, Dimond (2010) said that consent is a voluntarily decision which can be given orally, verbally, written or implied for example if you ask a patient to take their blood pressure and they offer their arm. Eyal (2012) also states that consent promote trust in medical procedures that people may seek and comply with medical advice and participate in medical research. Bok (2013) argues that there are problems with the trust-promoting as many patients give consent despite being to some extent distrustful.

However, donation involves asking ethical questions because the treatment affects not only the people in need of transplants but also the individuals who donate. The main reason why people may consider donating organs is because of the very great benefit that this can bring to others. On the other hand, some find the idea of organ donation too invasive. Those people believe that it is wrong to take organs from people. The decision to or not to donate is a moral decision.