The Tuskegee Syphilis Study - Example of Violation of Ethical Norms
The Tuskegee syphilis study raises an outsized cluster of problems diverging from its infringement of the ethical standards managing studies that enclosed human subjects. The problems incorporate racism, truth-telling, attitude, whistle processing, scientism, twofold measures, morbidness, and therefore the utilization of double dealing in explore, among others. The Tuskegee syphilis Study was initiated by the u. s. Public Health Service in 1932 to document the explanation of syphilis. The investigation subjects were 399 poor black sharecroppers with latent syphilis from Macon County, Alabama, and 201 men while not the illness that served because the control cluster. The doctors who conducted the study tricked the men and convinced them they were treated with “bad blood.” Moreover, people with syphilis were purposely denied treatment and went to extreme lengths to ensure that they did not receive care from any other outlet. The people received free food, free medical tests, and funeral benefits in return for their involvement.
A front-page headline in the New York Times read on July 26, 1972, 'Syphilis Patients in the United States. Study Went Untreated for 40 Years.' The accompanying article disclosed officially the results of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study—'the oldest non-therapeutic study on human beings in scientific history.' In the almost 25 years since its exposure, the Experiment has progressed from a unique historical occurrence. The Report has shifted from a unique historical case to a popular symbol in the almost 25 years since its release. It has come to symbolize racism in medicine, human research ethical misconduct, physician paternalism, and vulnerable people abuse by the government. From the very beginning of the recruitment process, subjects in the Tuskegee study have not been told the truth: they have been lied to and coaxed with cheap rewards such as free hot meals, free bus rides to and from the clinic, and placebo pills as free treatment, all to secure their 'approval' to participate in the research project. They maintained the true nature of the test to ensure their cooperation. However, “deceiving people in medical ethics usually means failing to respect their autonomy”. Furthermore, the absence of truth-telling clearly reflects a lack of informed consent, since the principle of informed consent needs the participant to be properly provided with information on all relevant aspects of the study.
As C.H. Braddock once pointed out, when doctors communicate with patients, being honest is an important way of fostering trust and showing respect for them. Patients place a lot of trust in their doctors and may feel that trust is misplaced if they find or recognize a lack of sincerity in them. Braddock's 'trust' underlined is really the centerpiece of medical practice, so that the relevance of medical practice itself can be questioned when it is lost.
In conclusion, the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment tends to throw a dark shadow on African Americans' current interaction with the medicinal world. Several recent articles have argued that many African Americans have been predisposed to distrust medical and public health authorities by the Tuskegee Syphilis Study.
