Ethical Issues in “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks” Free Essay Example

Rebecca Skloot's odyssey, "Unraveling the Tapestry of Henrietta's Impact," immerses readers in the mesmerizing tale of Henrietta and her family, unraveling the profound legacy of her cells on the medical landscape. Skloot's journey begins in a vibrant classroom, where her instructor fervently explores cell reproduction, casting a spotlight on the groundbreaking exploration through cancer cells in culture (Skloot, 2017). The turning point occurs when the professor, beaming with enthusiasm, writes in bold letters: Henrietta Lacks. Henrietta, the woman entangled in cervical cancer, emerges as the linchpin of a groundbreaking medical revelation.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get your custom essay on

“ Ethical Issues in “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks” ”

Get custom paper

NEW! smart matching with writer

Prior to her passing, a determined physician extracts samples from Henrietta's tumor, aiming to cultivate and preserve them in culture. Astonishingly, Henrietta's cells not only survive but flourish, challenging previous setbacks with human cells in laboratories. Intrigued, Skloot embarks on a quest to uncover Henrietta Lacks' life story, documenting her trials and examining the profound bioethical implications interwoven with her narrative.

Bioethics, an integral facet of scientific ethics, revolves around securing informed consent from patients or their proxies, particularly when patients cannot autonomously decide.

It mandates approval after a comprehensive understanding of potential risks and benefits associated with the proposed treatment. Throughout the tale, Skloot underscores the family's lack of awareness and understanding regarding the events surrounding Henrietta Lacks. The family's narrative is limited to their mother's illness and swift demise. As an African-American diagnosed with cervical cancer, Henrietta inadvertently becomes the source of immortal human cells (Cho et al., 2015). The specter of receiving substandard care due to systemic disparities rooted in her racial background looms.

Skloot (2017) sheds light on the challenges stemming from inadequate medical ethics, highlighting violations of human rights in Henrietta Lacks' treatment. Her journey initiates with the discovery of a "knot on [her] womb" during an examination at Johns Hopkins hospital (Skloot, 2017). Diagnosed with cervical cancer, Henrietta consents to operative procedures through a form granting physicians latitude for necessary interventions. However, the experimental nature and potential risks of the surgeries appear inadequately communicated, casting doubt on the unequivocal nature of Henrietta's consent.

"Unveiling Henrietta's Legacy" encapsulates a profound exploration of ethical and moral dimensions often overlooked in the 1940s and 1950s. Henrietta Lacks' narrative raises critical ethical questions concerning the attribution of a patient's biological material, such as cells extracted posthumously. In Lacks' case, her cells were harvested without explicit informed consent from her or her close relatives. The doctors, aware of the uniqueness of her cells during cervical cancer treatment, omit informing her or her family about this revelation. In contemporary contexts, the ubiquitous presence of "HeLa" cells in various scientific advancements and research endeavors underscores their significant impact (Skloot, 2017). Yet, Henrietta Lacks' family, instrumental in her care during illness, appears to have been exploited, lacking adequate compensation for the use of her cells. The debate over rightful compensation extends to whether Henrietta's cousins, who cared for her during illness, or her husband and children are the rightful recipients of any financial reparation.

This poignant narrative prompts reflection on the enduring ethical implications of scientific advancements, shedding light on the ethical dilemmas surrounding patient consent, transparency, and just compensation in the realm of medical research and biotechnology.

The satirical nature of Henrietta Lacks' case becomes glaringly evident as the research community reaps immense profits from the widespread use of her cells, yet none of her family members receive financial compensation or medical support in acknowledgment of her invaluable contribution. In stark contrast, Henrietta's daughter and grandchildren grapple with life's challenges, facing inadequate medical care and lacking health coverage. A notable incident unfolds post-Henrietta's demise when physicians sought to conduct an autopsy, requiring her husband's consent as mandated by the law (Cho et al., 2015). Initially resistant, Henrietta's husband succumbs to coercion, with the promise that their children would benefit from any medical advancements arising from the autopsy (Skloot, 2017). This coerced consent raises concerns about the integrity of the informed consent process, challenging established procedures for obtaining consent from individuals.

The breach of privacy rights and the disregard for the family's informed consent are apparent as the connection between "HeLa" cells and Henrietta is broadcasted in the media without explicit permission from the family. The possession and commercial utilization of human biological material, a contemporary ethical dilemma, spark debates on informed consent, privacy rights, and the equitable sharing of profits derived from such processes (Cho et al., 2015). I propose that donors should provide informed consent explicitly outlining the potential use of their biological components for research and commercial purposes. Donors must be given the autonomy to consent or withhold consent, and physicians must exercise diligence to uphold ethical principles.

The legal framework clarifies ownership rights, asserting that once a donor contributes cells or blood for research, they forfeit ownership rights once these materials are extracted. Consequently, a donor cannot claim profits arising from the commercial use of their donated materials unless informed consent was provided beforehand. Emphasizing the ethical principle of autonomy, physicians must navigate the delicate balance between scientific advancement and respecting the rights of donors.

In conclusion, ethical considerations regarding human biological materials demand careful attention, placing significant emphasis on obtaining informed consent. Research consortiums should establish models to reward donors for their contributions, recognizing the ethical imperative to acknowledge the sources of scientific discoveries. Henrietta Lacks, instrumental in the discovery of "HeLa" cells, deserves acknowledgment and, along with her family, should have been rewarded during that pivotal moment in medical history.

The saga of Henrietta Lacks underscores the ethical complexities inherent in medical research, with profound implications for informed consent, privacy, and the equitable distribution of benefits. The coercive nature of Henrietta's husband's consent for an autopsy raises ethical questions about the voluntariness of the decision-making process, emphasizing the need for transparent and respectful practices in obtaining consent. The breach of privacy, as the media broadcasts the connection between "HeLa" cells and Henrietta without explicit family consent, highlights the importance of upholding confidentiality and respecting the wishes of those involved.

Contemporary debates surrounding the commercial use of human biological material necessitate a reevaluation of ethical frameworks. Informed consent, coupled with a commitment to privacy and profit-sharing, emerges as a cornerstone for ethically sound practices. Donors should be empowered to make informed decisions about the use of their biological materials, and research institutions must prioritize transparency in their dealings.

The legal landscape, while providing guidance on ownership rights, needs to be complemented by ethical considerations to ensure that donors are treated with fairness and respect. The autonomy of donors should be upheld, and mechanisms for acknowledging and compensating their contributions should be integrated into research practices.

As we reflect on Henrietta Lacks' story, it becomes evident that ethical principles should not be relegated to the sidelines in the pursuit of scientific progress. Donors, like Henrietta, play a crucial role in advancing medical knowledge, and their rights should be safeguarded. Scientific advancements should not come at the cost of neglecting the ethical responsibilities owed to those who contribute to the greater body of knowledge.