Henritta Lacks Paper

The immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks tells a fascinating bosh of a sample of cells that forever changed the landscape of scientific search. The book tells the falsehood of the family related to Henrietta Lacks. The book touches on the doctor and unhurried relationship. Henrietta Lacks cells (also cognize as HeLa) became involved in bringing informed consent to the research field. The diligent didnt always k right away what the doctor was doing to them. The doctor should always inform the subject of what they are doing and the purpose before the subject earth-closet consent.Informed consent is a legal procedure to ensure that a patient or client knows all of the risks and costs involved in a treatment. Up to 1947, the thought of informed consent hadnt even track anyones mind. In 1947, the Nuremberg trials were held wherein 7 Nazi scientist were convicted of conducting unthink fitting tests on Judaic subjects. This marked the first time informed consent entered anyones consci ence. It mum wasnt law. It was just an ethical code which had no legal bindings.Then ten years later, when scientist Southman was injecting HeLa into patients bodies without telling them how dangerous it was and about of them died and an investigation ensued. This ca theatrical roled a discrepancy between people and doctors. Some doctors decided against informed consent because it would interfere with their research practices. There was great fear amongst the African American society about doctors kidnapping them and doing all sorts of wild tests on them. There was some truth to these apprehensions.Doctors would regularly test on African Americans with consent. In the book, when the doctors have a bun in the oven Day if they can do an autopsy they didnt give him the consentaneous expatiate. But that wasnt the rule back in those times. The problem with explicateing the details to people is that they simply wouldnt understand what the doctor was talking about. The patient ha d no clue what a cell was. So rather than explain what they were doing in detail they would just tell that it would benefit their children. This is wrong, doctors shouldnt ascertain the easy way out.They should inform their patients of the extent of their intentions. The doctors would prey on the total darkness communitys ignorance in the medical field. The doctors should have just told them their intentions. In todays atmosphere, the rights of patients are more protected than they were in the 1950s. Doctors now have a legal and ethical duty to inform patients in all areas. Therefore, more information is available to patients so they are able to make intelligent and informed decisions on their medical treatment and use of their tissue, cells or organs.