Introduction
Ethics is the principal moral conduct which addresses issues which are perceive to infringe the rights of an individual. Ethics tries to define and guide us how an individual should live in a society in a harmony. It also tries to analyze the impacts of one’s behavior to others and its social consequence in the long run. It also compares what is moral one society and what is not in another society. This is because our societies are divergent what is accepted as moral in one society can be regarded as totally immoral in another society. A good example is marriage between relatives. In Arab society is accepted but in Christian society, this is totally wrong. Ethics seek to answer questions that deal with correct concept of humanity such as good from evil or right from wrong and delivering the right justice to the deserving party.
Ethics is making appropriate decision based on our common sense. It asks an individual before doing something is better to think critically the consequences of the action to others and one’s self. A person should not harm or cause injuries both physical and mentally to another person intentionally unless it is a case of self defense.
Social sciences are a great pillar in research. They help us to better understand most of the phenomenon in our society. It involves systematic engagement of collecting data and analyzing the gathered information to come up with solutions to the problems our society is facing. The results of the research should be shared to the public and other scientific research organs. During the research the people or the subject who are involved in the research should be made aware what is the purpose of the research and what dangers are associated with the research. The researcher should get consent from the subjects of the research before conducting the research. The life of the human subject, his/her privacy and integrity should be protected at all times during the research and after. Research should be voluntary experiment and every person needs to know what they are getting themselves into.
What ethical principles are at issue in each case? Provide and justify specific examples
The voluntary consent and the benefits of the participants, The case of The Tea-Room Trade (Humphreys 1975) the participants were not aware a research was being conducted on them. They had no given their consent in this research which will have a serious effect on their privacy matters especially their sexual relationship. However, in the case of Tuskegee Syphilis Studies (various authors, 1930s – 1970s) the participant were fully aware of the research and gave their consent but they were not given enough information about the diseases or the importance of the research. The use of ‘bad blood’ is morally wrong. This affects one psychology and makes one feel he/she is unworthy. The victims were denied treatment though they participated in the research.
The participants in a research should have a full knowledge of what they are getting themselves into and what are the risks associated with the research. The subjects should also know what kinds of benefits are entitled to them when the research is complete. This information should never be kept away from the subject. A person should make an informed consent. The consent should be given freely and willingly hence the subject should not have any doubt at the back of their minds. The subjects should be allowed to ask for more information and clarification as much as they like. The information should be given in a simple language which a subject can comprehend fully.
The information which the subject is given should say the real purpose of the research and why the research is conducted on the subject and for how long. The subject/participants should know what criteria are used when one wants to withdraw from the research and what consequence be it health wise or socially which might follow the subject after withdrawing. There should be no force or coercion in getting the subject to participate in the research. In Humphreys case the researcher deceived the police officers in getting the details of the couples the officers were not aware that there was going to be research on the couple.
The subject who participate in a medical research where they have to take medication or go through some experiments which will alter their normal body functions, they should be given medical treatment after the research is completed. They should be made aware in advance the changes they are supposed to expect and measures are there to correct the changes. The subjects must be given insurance cover against the risks associated with the changes expected. In the case of Tuskegee Syphilis Studies (various authors, 1930s – 1970s) the subject didn’t get any medical cover on their syphilis which resulted in many individual to lose their lives.
Confidentiality and privacy, the participant in the research should be able to feel comfortable and free to share personal information. They should not feel they are put in awkward by sharing sensitive information which when exposed to the public can jeopardize their normal life. The researcher should prove to the subject without reasonable doubt that their personal information is in safe hands. The participant should be given the right and freedom decides how much information to give no to give reveal about them. When the subject feels that the research is going deeper into his or her personal life the subject should stop the research
The subjects in the research have the autonomy right to know how the information about themselves is managed and who have access to it and how it should be used and how this information is kept as secret between the research officer who was given the information and the subject. When this information spills out into the public, the rights of the subjects and privacy will have been infringe and violated. The subject should have the right to sue the researcher for not doing his/her obligation of protecting the information of the subject. In Humphrey’s case the researcher violated their privacy rights when he pretended that he was a health worker at their home. The researcher did not get permission from them to come into their private home. He also violated their confidentiality by recording their licenses number which can be dangerous if it falls in the wrong hands.
The subject confidentiality should be protected at all times. The patient should feel secure to share his/her information with the researcher. The researcher should keep the information about the patient private and assist the patient in getting better or improving their condition. In the case of Tuskegee Syphilis Studies (various authors, 1930s – 1970s) their information got into the public and the patients who went for the test didn’t benefit in any way. Their life even became worse than before the researcher was conducted. They were not told what really affect them and what was the purpose of the research and what was the use of the information they gave.
When subject data is required to be used in comparison with other data from other researches which have been conduct before or after, the subject should be notified in advanced. The participant should know the kind of the research is conducted how useful is his or her data in the research. This will help participant make an informed decision of whether to participate or not. The researcher should take the obligation of protecting the information given at all cost if not he/she have no right in conducting the research
Professionally, many institutions bodies, professional groups and the government has put in place rules and regulations on how subject information should be used and kept safe at all times. They have also put in place rules and procedures on how a researcher should conduct and behave themselves during the research. However, this goes beyond the rules and obligations put in place. The researcher should be a morally upright man or woman with a high integrity standard which is unquestionable with or without rules. The moral obligation of the researcher is to make sure the subject in the research is in good hand so as his/her information. No evil means should be intended on the participant. In the Tuskegee Syphilis Studies (various authors, 1930s – 1970s) the researcher did not act professionally since they did advice the patients who came for the test what treatment are available and where they should get them. The two research were discriminatory by themselves they target one race and one type of relationship.
The researcher should conduct their duties professionally at all the times. The person who conducts a research should be guide by the oath of the office or work. Individual differences should not come to the surface. The personnel should respect themselves and the subject. They should not use the patient information for the malicious use in any way.
What strategies were used to insure the standards of ethical research?
The two researches the consent was given for the research to be conducted though the researcher disguised themselves and the information about the purpose of the research was no given in the both cases. Though the consent was given the subjects were not fully aware what they were getting themselves into.
The case of Tuskegee Syphilis Studies, the participants went for the free test since the research was conducted in the health centre, it portrayed a professional and a legitimate exercise which was going to be a benefit to the subject since they will be able to know their health status and start treatment if they had syphilis. The subject has confidence with the professionals they got at the facility and share valuable information. The researcher went against their professionalism when they did encourage the patient to seek medical care.
In Humphrey’s case the participant gave consent since they thought the person who was conducting the research was a health professional and was concerned about their health and wellbeing not about their sexuality but the researcher had malicious motives. They gave their information freely since they thought is the usual doctor- patient discussion where the patient details are kept a secret between the doctor and the patient. During the 1970s homosexuality was a taboo in most states and in the society in general. So when ‘the health expert’ came to ‘johns’ home, the couple felt the information they gave was going to be treated with outmost secrecy and confidential since the research was not conducted in public place like a hotel or in a health facility. If the couples were given the true purpose of the visit they might have refuse to take part in the study.
In both researches the subjects were hoping the research was going to improve their lives so they had a reason to participate freely and voluntary. The information was given but the subjects did not question the motives of the research. The participants had the freedom of choosing whether to participate or not.
Were those strategies successful? How and why
The strategies employed by the two researches were success and brought the results which were intended. The two researches got the data they were after though illegally and morally wrong.
In the Tuskegee Syphilis Studies (various authors, 1930s – 1970s) the information about the research was circulated in the community from mouth to mouth information advertising. People got interested since everyone was talking about it and it was conducted in a respectable health facility in the locality hence the residence had the confidence of going for the test voluntarily which was for free. The health facility is a professional place hence people are always ready to share their secrets and various test when they are ask to since they have trust on the judgment of the health expert. The test was free and voluntarily hence many didn’t fill the financial pinch which is usually associated with many medical tests in the hospitals. Syphilis is a chronic disease which is feared by many since it can kill and prevent one to engage in sexual activities which can be devastating for many. These reasons were push mechanisms which made many to take part in the research freely.
In the Humphrey’s case the researcher took time to study them by collecting valuable information about them hence knew how to deceive the couple with the information at hand. The researcher had the information which can be available to a personal doctor or the police station when is locked up due a crime committed. This made the couple not to doubt the researcher when he paid them a visit. The couple participated fully in the research since they believed the health officer (researcher) knew them well.
What alternate strategies might also have been used to achieve the same or better results?
In the Humphrey’s case the researcher could have told them in the first place what he intended to do and what is the benefit of the research to them and the whole society in general. The researcher should have told the couples that the information they gave will be treated with the outmost confidentiality and their privacy will be maintained. The couples will be given the freedom to conceal their true identity and to choose which information they feel comfortable to share with the researcher. This might haven the couple enough confidence to participate in the research. If the research maintained his word of confidentiality and sincerity the couple could have informed other couples who practice homosexuality and encourage them to participate in the research. This will help the researcher to get a variety of information to use in the writing of the report of the research findings and come up with well exhaust recommendations. This will help the whole society in the understanding of homosexual couples better. The cost of the research could have also come down and also time could have been saved. The research could take less than a year and get more people to participate.
In the Tuskegee Syphilis Studies (various authors, 1930s – 1970s) the participant could have been told where and how to seek medical attention if they are affected and how to prevent the disease from being transmitted to other people. This will give more people to volunteer since they could see the benefit of the exercise.
Which case study represents a better implementation of research ethics? How and why?
The Tuskegee Syphilis Studies (various authors, 1930s – 1970s) was well executed than the Humphrey’s case since the participants were in invited free and come at their own free will. There was wide information on the ground about the exercise hence it was a legitimate research though it went against good morals of health professional where patients are given advice on how and where to seek treatment. The research reached a wide population hence the findings and conclusions of research are more comprehensive and informatory since many people participated in the research.
References
Humphreys, L. (1975). Tearoom Trade: Impersonal sex in public places. Enlarged edition with a retrospect on ethical issues. New Brunswick, NJ: Aldine Transaction.
Reverby, S. (2000). Tuskegee's truths: Rethinking the Tuskegee syphilis study. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
