Ethicizing history. Bioethical representations of Nazi medicine

The article presents and analyzes different approaches of U.S. bioethicists in comprehending the Nazi medical crimes after 1945. The account is divided into two sections: one dealing with discussions on research ethics and the Nuremberg Code up until the 1970s and the other ranging from the 1970s to the present and highlighting bioethics' engagement with Nazi analogies. The portrayal of different bioethical scholars, institutions, and documents-most notably Henry K. Beecher, Jay Katz, the Belmont Report, the Hastings Center, Arthur L. Caplan, and Robert M. Veatch-provides a nuanced interpretation of the motives that bioethicists held and the strategies that they applied to establish an understanding of the Nazi medical crimes and their relation to contemporary bioethical issues. In this, the different approaches shared a common goal: To integrate the Nazi medical crimes into an ethical framework by means of selective acknowledgments and representation of their history.

Human Infection Challenge Experiments: Then and Now

In the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic, ethicists, researchers, and journalists have recommended studies that deliberately infect healthy volunteers with the coronavirus as a scientific means of expediting vaccine development. In this essay, we trace the history of infection challenge experiments and reflect on the Nuremberg Code of 1947, issued in response to brutal human experiments conducted by Nazi investigators in concentration camps. We argue that the Code continues to offer valuable guidance for assessing the ethics of this controversial form of research, with respect particularly to the acceptable limits to research risks and the social value of research necessary to justify exposing human participants to these risks.

The American Neurological Association's Book "Eugenical Sterilization: A Reorientation of the Problem" Through the Lens of Contemporaneous Book Reviews

BACKGROUND

In 1936, the American Neurological Association (ANA) published the book "Eugenical Sterilization: A Reorientation of the Problem" in response to what the first author of the book described as a positive reception to a paper presented at the ANA's 1935 annual meeting. The conclusions of the presentation were approved by the organization during the same meeting. As evidenced by the publication of several book reviews in a variety of medical journals, the book garnered some attention.

METHODS

Reviews of the ANA's book were sought using PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embasa. Also, the book's title was used to search the World Wide Web.

RESULTS

The search yielded four reviews, all published in 1937. The reviews make evident a positive opinion of the ANA's book's authors' recommendations including the option for "selective sterilization" of patients with conditions such as Huntington disease, Friedreich ataxia, and epilepsy. In addition, reviewers highlighted the book's authors' assessment that "the feebleminded [breed] docile, servile, useful people who do the dirty work of the race, [as] servants fulfilling a social function."

CONCLUSIONS

Although the book's authors did not advocate for all-out eugenical sterilization, they did little to counter the popular opinion that patients with certain neurological diseases were a drain on society. In addition, they espoused a positive vision of the feebleminded's role as servants who can do undesirable work. This message was disseminated through book reviews.

More Declassified Evidence Implicates CIA Physicians in Unethical Research

In 2010, in an article in this journal, I argued that declassified documents implicated Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) physicians in the conduct of unethical research on enhanced interrogation using detainee subjects. The focus, then as now, is upon physicians at the Office of Medical Services (OMS). The 2010 article highlighted the heavily redacted "Draft OMS Guidelines on Medical and Psychological Support to Detainee Interrogations" (the Draft). This commentary focuses upon the recently declassified final version of that document revealing further culpable evidence of unethical human subject research. The commentary locates that unethical research in historical context and the development of the Nuremberg Code. The commentary also locates enhanced interrogation in contemporary political context and considers how to hold OMS physicians accountable for the conduct of unethical human research using detainee subjects.

Personalized Medicine: Ethical Aspects

In our time of genome-based personalized medicine, clinical research and clinical medicine are accelerating at a quick pace. Faster and cheaper DNA sequencing and protein profiling, microfluidic devices for capturing blood biomarkers, nanoparticles for precise drug delivery and enhanced imaging, rapid computational analysis of massive data inputs, and other technological wonders coalesce to create a kind of Moore's Law for medicine. Needs are obvious, knowledge grows, capital becomes available, but these factors are not entirely sufficient to make health more achievable. Personalized medicine also requires social acceptability, not only for accuracy and efficacy but also because medicine is a moral domain. This chapter deals with medical ethics that determine the choices a society makes regarding healthcare; and it has not always been a steady, morally correct course of progress. Indeed, medical ethics has largely derived from socio-scientific calamities in the past. Personalized medicine, with its enhanced capacity to access the individuality of illness, must have a continuously evolving feedback mechanism-the most important element being the physician-patient relationship-which is its ethical footing.

Knowledge, attitudes and practice of healthcare ethics and law among doctors and nurses in Barbados

Background

The aim of the study is to assess the knowledge, attitudes and practices among healthcare professionals in Barbados in relation to healthcare ethics and law in an attempt to assist in guiding their professional conduct and aid in curriculum development.

Methods

A self-administered structured questionnaire about knowledge of healthcare ethics, law and the role of an Ethics Committee in the healthcare system was devised, tested and distributed to all levels of staff at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Barbados (a tertiary care teaching hospital) during April and May 2003.

Results

The paper analyses 159 responses from doctors and nurses comprising junior doctors, consultants, staff nurses and sisters-in-charge. The frequency with which the respondents encountered ethical or legal problems varied widely from 'daily' to 'yearly'. 52% of senior medical staff and 20% of senior nursing staff knew little of the law pertinent to their work. 11% of the doctors did not know the contents of the Hippocratic Oath whilst a quarter of nurses did not know the Nurses Code. Nuremberg Code and Helsinki Code were known only to a few individuals. 29% of doctors and 37% of nurses had no knowledge of an existing hospital ethics committee. Physicians had a stronger opinion than nurses regarding practice of ethics such as adherence to patients' wishes, confidentiality, paternalism, consent for procedures and treating violent/non-compliant patients (p = 0.01)

Conclusion

The study highlights the need to identify professionals in the workforce who appear to be indifferent to ethical and legal issues, to devise means to sensitize them to these issues and appropriately training them.

Financial conflicts of interest in biomedical human subject research

The purpose of this paper is to examine the past, present and future of financial conflict of interest regulation in biomedical human subject testing. Part I will briefly review the forces giving rise to the current controversy. Part II will examine the more influential ethical codes on human subject testing and argue that they are inconclusive on the subject of financial conflicts of interest. Part III will examine the various regulations now in place and identify their serious flaws. Part IV will critique the leading proposals for reform. The Conclusion will synthesize the best features of the various proposals for reform and suggest improvements left unaddressed by these proposals.

Ethics in human experimentation: the two military physicians who helped develop the Nuremberg Code

The Nuremberg Code is generally considered the beginning of modern ethics in human experimentation. The Code is a list of 10 principles that Judge Walter Beals included in the judgment he delivered at the close of the Nuremberg Medical Trial on 19 August 1947. Recently, scholars have studied the origin of the Code, who wrote it, and why. This is important to military medicine and the Aerospace Medical Association in particular because many of the defendants claimed their crimes were experiments in aviation and environmental physiology conducted under wartime conditions. The chief prosecutor of the Nuremberg Medical Trial, General Telford Taylor, relied on the guidance of an advisor provided by the American Medical Association, Andrew C. Ivy, one of the foremost physiologists of his time. The neurologist, Leo Alexander, then a colonel in the U.S. Army Reserves, was another medical advisor. Both men were crucial to the development of Taylor's courtroom strategy. The material Alexander and Ivy provided was incorporated verbatim in the section of the judgment that became the Code. Although both men contributed to the Code, Ivy provided what seems to be the first formulation of many of these principles during a meeting of Allied medical investigators at the Pasteur Institute in July 1946. Naval researchers should note that Ivy had been the Director of the Research Division of the Naval Medical Research Institute when it was commissioned on October 27, 1942.

Children as guinea pigs: historical perspective

Experimentation involving children is not a new phenomenon. Children have been used as research subjects in a diverse set of experiments, including the trials of new vaccines and sera, in efforts to understand normal pediatric anatomy and physiology and in the development of new drugs and procedures. Concern about child participants in research is also not a new development. For more than a century, critics of medical research have called attention to the fact that children and other vulnerable populations--pregnant women, prisoners, the mentally ill--have too often served as the unwitting and unwilling subjects of medical experiments. This paper looks at several early cases in which children participated, including the first trial of cowpox vaccine, the first human trial of rabies vaccine, and the first treatment of Listerian wound antisepsis. The history of concern for children, especially institutionalized children, in medical research is considered along with the development of regulations or guidelines, including the Declaration of Helsinki (1964).

Embryonic stem cell research: one small step for science or one giant leap back for mankind?

At the forefront of modern debate over the ethical use of biotechnology is embryonic stem cell research. In this poignant analysis of its legitimacy, the author examines the history of this research in light of the United States' policy favoring the protection of human beings over scientific progress. Stem cells, which can divide in culture to create specialized cells in the human body, possess significant potential for curing disease, particularly when taken from human embryos. However, as evidenced by the research atrocities committed under the Nazi regime, the benefits of human research do not come without a cost to humanity. Recognizing this, the later trial of these scientists produced the Nuremberg Code, a set of natural law principles guiding future research on humans that continues to influence health policy decisions. Drawing on this background, the author first considers the appropriate legal status for a human embryo. Biologically, the characteristics of a human embryo place it between human tissue and a constitutional person. Judicially, the answer is even less clear. The author analyzes case law in the context of abortion and in vitro fertilization, as well as classifications by the common law, state legislation, and the National Bioethics Advisory Commission, to conclude that a human embryo should be subject to the same legal and ethical restrictions as any other "human subject." Accordingly, the author argues that embryonic stem cell research violates the ethical standards and purposes of the Nuremberg Code and should be banned by federal legislation. Such a prohibition will fulfill the societal policy choice of protecting potential life and vulnerable human subjects.

Ethics and children's rights: learning from past mistakes

The primary aim of this article is to examine, within the context of recent controversial child health practice and research, the underlying philosophy of the aspect of the Nursing and Midwifery Council's Code of Professional Conduct which states that: 'You are personally accountable for ensuring that you promote and protect the interests and dignity of patients and clients, irrespective of gender, age, race, ability, sexuality, economic status, lifestyle, culture and religious or political belief.' A description of the Nuremberg Code, the Helsinki Declaration, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the Human Rights Act 1998 will form the backdrop to this article and a range of contemporary examples will be used to illuminate the ethical dilemmas facing children's nurses in their day-to-day work. Within this context the four major principles that underpin healthcare this will be investigated and the legacy of historical unethical practice and research acknowledged. The vulnerability of children and their families to potential coercion, and the role of local research ethics committees, will be discussed.

The Nuremberg Code: its history and implications

The Nuremberg Code is a foundational document in the ethics of medical research and human experimentation; the principle its authors espoused in 1946 have provided the framework for modern codes that address the same issues, and have received little challenge and only slight modification in decades since. By analyzing the Code's tragic genesis and its normative implications, it is possible to understand some of the essence of modern experimental ethics, as well as certain outstanding controversies that still plague medical science.

Human subjects--are they protected?

From the time of Hippocrates, physicians have sworn to "abstain from all intentional wrongdoing and harm," (Lifton, 1986). They are guided by ethical principles and theories that are intended to help them in their practice of medicine and scientific research. The purpose of this paper was to define research and human subjects, to review cases of abuse, address benefits and risks of human experimentation, discuss regulations governing experiments on humans, and address ethical principles and theories regarding this type of research. Human experimentation is an important activity of great societal benefit that must be conducted in a manner consistent with basic societal beliefs and values about the rights and worth of an individual (Gray, 1975). Ethical issues in human experimentation defy definite solutions, and the problems involved in human experimentation will almost certainly continue to receive active attention in future years.