Ethics in Medical Trials - Coursework Example

Ethics in Medical Trials Ethics in Medical Trials Introduction Ethic in health research is an essential element that guarantees the users of the information a high magnitude of reliability, trustworthiness, and confidence of the research findings. Medical researches carried out in different medical centers are challenging, especially in the commencing of the 21st century with the aftermath of both the first and Second World Wars. Such periods have been characterized by spread of chronic diseases in the affected parts of the world. This led to intensive measure of the medical trial experiments to obtain different treatments of different chronic diseases. However, a key aspect to note is that during these times ethic in medical trials was never observed, especially in America, where the blacks were subjected to these experiments with whites used as the control objects. Despite, the long-term outcome of any medical trial, ethical codes must be established to eliminate torture, humiliation and deaths of the participating individuals. Tuskegee Syphilis Study The Tuskegee Syphilis experiment is a traumatizing medical trial that none of institutional review boards can approve in the today’s medical platform. The experiment has been characterized by various aspects of failure to observe the basic and the binding ethics of medical research. The trial aimed at finding the lethality of syphilis in males. This is a sexually transmitted illness that is chronic to individuals contracted by the disease (Darell and Sadaf, 2011). However, Rosenweld Foundation carried out the research using 600 blacks as the participatory objects and 200 whites as the control objects. All the ethical principles of research were debased in this study. For instance, it was based on racial profiling that included the use of low-income with high rates of illiteracy. The principles of beneficence, autonomy, veracity and justice were never observed. Knowingly, the committee withheld the right treatment for syphilis in order to carry on with the study (Darell and Sadaf, 2011). All participants were not allowed to make voluntary decisions in regard to the subject of the study. To cover the situation, the whites steering the study offered free burial services to the deceased members as a false concern. In addition, there was no disclosure of any information regarding the right treatment of syphilis. In regards to this, all the physicians suspected to have information about the treatment of the infection, were not allowed to make any intervention. Lastly, justice was not observed in implementing this medical trial. It was based on discriminatory stem that Africans were intentionally subjected to the test, unlike their white counterparts (Darell and Sadaf, 2011). All these aspects of failure to observe ethical codes during such a study makes it never be approved by any institutional board. Example of Today’s Medical Trials Nevertheless, there are more of such trials conducted across the world, especially to a discovery of a new disease. For instance, the outbreak of Ebola in Western Africa has led to the establishment of drug trial experiment to be conducted by Oxford University Scientists. The study digs to establish whether brincidofovir antiviral drug is effective in the treatment of Ebola. This precedes the medical trial by INSERM that tries to investigate whether Avigan (favipiravir) drugs can help fight of Ebola in Belgium. These two trials are based on WHO and MSF ethical principles and protocols to compare their results. Participants in these two trials are wholly insured with their families in case of any damages whatsoever cropping from the studies. Results are communicated to the public and the progress of all the participants. These studies are based on a voluntary basis to help affected peoples survive and generate future anti-drugs for Ebola. Other common clinical trials include the Australian, and the American Cancer trials carried out by the American Cancer Institute. All, the procedures in these trials, are monitored through the WHO protocols and medical doctrines. These protect the rights and prevent molestation of the participants by the testing body. All drugs are administered with the consent of participants with effective policies protecting the study. Such policies ensure no conflict of interest arising in the matter, as well as, adherence to ethical codes to the participants (Marek, 2006). Restrictions Placed on Medical Experiments and Drug Testing in the 21st Century There are various local and international policies and agents that provide guidelines that place restrictions on medical experiments. Such restrictions ensure ethical part of any research is adhered to and participants in these experiments. Helsinki Declaration is one of the most effective rulings that guarantee protection to the participants of any clinical trial. It restricts the limits to the general effectiveness of bioethics committees of various medical researches. In addition, they have had restrictions that guide the selection of the bioethics committees,especially through the use of balloting techniques to increase transparency and accountability of the steering committee in such experiments. Nevertheless, these two bodies stipulate the protocol that the medical bodies need to adhere to during all the experiments. For instance, the insurance policy must be observed and all insured agents must bear responsibilities that are the outcome of the experiments to the participants. OSHA standards and the Drug-testing laws protect the participants from privacy violations since they require intensive monitoring (Randal and Pittman, 2002).units conducting these experiments in humiliating the subjects (Marek, 2006). It emphasizes on effective treatment; participants have free access to the drugs after experiments are done since some of the drugs are much expensive for them. Other restrictions are placed by the Ethical Guidelines by the WHO, European Forum for the Good Medical and Clinical Practices, the OSHA standards, and the Drug-testing Laws in workplaces. WHO and the European Union Forum have put various restrictions in research that have aimed at protecting the subjects of the study. They have adopted the Polish Law that puts no Pros and Cons of these Restrictions All these restrictions are essential and beneficial to the subjects of the medical experiments. They guarantee safety during the experiments and compensation in case of any harm to the participants or death. This requires all the participants to be insured against all the risks that may come along with the trials. The adherence to the WHO and European Guidelines and the Polish law allows justice during these experiments, as well as, formulating a precise protocol that needs to be followed to eliminate conflicts of interests (Marek, 2006). It is worth notable that, many participants and nursing practitioners may be driven by financial, social and material ties to the research. Moreover, such guidelines and restrictions allow autonomy, beneficence, veracity and respect for the participants (Randal and Pittman, 2002). All these aspects reduce the vulnerability, hostility and molestation of the study participants such as those of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. However, despite the benefits of all these restrictions, there are various drawbacks associated with every restriction that has been passed across. For instance, there are high chances of conflicts of interests by specific practitioners in different experiments in terms of material, financial and social ties in these researches. This limits the goals of other expertise in the experiment and violates the ethical environment of the study. Other policies and committee spearheads fail to note specific meritorical reviews of the insurance cover for the participants. Impunity may arise in civil liability insurance policy and leave harmed participants uncompensated after the experiment. Marek, (2006) argues that lack of knowledge while implementing various policies and restrictions may lead to ineffective amendments by the bioethics committee. Such erroneous amendments lead to deviations from the pre-set ethical guidelines against the Article 37s of the Polish Pharmaceuticals Act. Such situations may cause humiliation to the participants (Randal and Pittman, 2002). References Darell N B., & Sadaf U. (2011). The application of the Tuskegee Syphilis experiments as historical framework for exploration of innovative approaches for public helatyh ethical. IJSHIM, Vol 4. Issue 9, pp. 112-122. Marek C. (2006). The Protection of Patients’ Rights in Clinical Trials. Science and Engineering Ethics Journal, Vol. 12, P, 131-138. Randal G K. & Pittman J R. (2002). Drug testing Laws and Employemnt injuries. Journal of Labor Research. Vol 23. Pp 293. Read More