Application of the Nuremberg Code - Research Paper Example

Ethical research of human s Introduction For a long time, the use of human s in research was carried out in a manner that was essentially unethical and this was done in a way that the subjects did not have the much-needed protection against physical and psychological harm. The outcome was that many individual and state actors tended to use individuals as research subjects for finding out how humans could react under different circumstances. The need to ensure preservation of human dignity as well as protection of subjects against harm led to the development of different ethical codes (Perlman, 2004). One of the most famous of the codes that are used in most instances of human research in the world today is the Nuremberg Code. This was put in place after the realization of the crimes against human subjects that the scientists of Nazi Germany had conducted on their subjects. The discovery of these atrocities made it possible for the realization of the extent of unethical practices against human subjects that had taken place throughout modern history and led to the development of rules to guide any future research on human subjects. Application of the Nuremberg Code One of the ten ethical requirements of Nuremberg Code was that researchers had to acquire the consent of all human subjects before going ahead with the research procedure. This has to be done in such a manner that the subject is not only legally competent to make decisions concerning his participation in the research, but is also not coerced into taking part of the research through unethical means. Furthermore, the subject has to be given all the material concerning the research that is to be conducted so that he can make the decision of whether to become a participant based on the facts that he knows (Weindling, 2001). In this way, the potential subject recognizes what he is getting into and will not be surprised by the things which he is required to do or undergo during the research process. Moreover, information concerning the nature, duration, and purpose of the research has to be provided to the subject so that he knows and is psychologically prepared to take part in it. The subject also has to be made aware of the potential risks or hazards that he is likely to face during the research process, especially in the case where experiments have to be conducted on his person so that he prepares himself to go through it. It is the responsibility of the person who initiates the experiment to ensure that the subject is provided with all the information above and this is a personal responsibility which should not be delegated to any other individual. The other Nuremberg Code requirement is that all experiments that are conducted using human subjects should be done with the intention of making findings, which are for the good of the society (Shore, 2006). Furthermore, it is essential for the researcher to find out whether the research can be conducted through other means because conducting experiments on human subjects should not be done if similar results can be achieved in other ways. Moreover, human subjects should only be involved in research or experiments whose procedure is expected to be safe as well as predictable because to involve such subjects in random and unnecessary experiments would be an infringement on their individual rights. Because of the strict regulations concerning the use of human subjects in the modern world, it has become necessary for researchers to conduct experiments on animals first and it is only after achieving success that these experiments can be conducted on human subjects. In this way, there has been a lessening of harm on human subjects in research and in most cases, side effects end to be detected early and corrected before they bring about lasting damage to the health of subjects. When conducting medical research, the Nuremberg Code deems it necessary to ensure that human subjects are not employed in the research till or before the researcher can develop as much knowledge as possible concerning a disease (“Trials of War”, 1949). It is essential for a researcher to discern the origins of a disease as well as its history so that its effects on the human body can be anticipated and dealt with in such a manner that harm can be reduced. Therefore, in order to develop a safe design for conducting experiments on human subjects, it is essential to first conduct experiments on animal subjects and once these are successful, then they can be performed on human subjects. Because a number of experiments are not always safe for human subjects or they have an adverse effect on them, it is essential for a researcher to develop a design which also anticipates the results of the experiment so that only those with the most chance of success should be conducted on human subjects. Experiments on human subjects need to be conducted in such a way that they do not bring about unnecessary physical and mental harm on them. Taking into consideration the welfare of human subjects tended not to be a priority before the development of ethical codes on the subject. This is especially true of Nazi Germany where there was no consideration for the physical and mental wellbeing of the human subjects (“Trials of War”, 1949). Nazi scientists often used human subjects before conducting animal experiments to find out how humans would potentially react to these experiments. The result was the a large number of human subjects who were used in experiments in Nazi Germany tended to end up with such grievous harm on their persons that they did not survive for long after the experiments were conducted. The lack of consideration for human subjects by researchers made it difficult for Nazi scientists to conduct their experiments not only in an ethical manner, but also in a way that ensured they had a difficult time in achieving conclusive results because of the harm that they caused their subjects. In addition, it is essential to ensure that when a research is conducted on human subjects, it does not lead to the death of the subject because this would be to defeat the purpose of the experiment, which should be conducted for the good of the society. The only exception in such circumstances is where the physicians who are conducting the experiments also take part in it as subjects. A lack of regard for human subjects is an immoral conduct which should be treated as murder in case a subject dies during the experiment (The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1978). One would cite the actions of Nazi scientists in their experiments that led to the deaths of many subjects were among the worst atrocities on fellow human beings conducted in the name of science. Therefore, in order to ensure that such actions do not take place again, it is necessary for the physicians to be willing to become subjects in their own experiments whenever there is any risk of death occurring as a result. Such a step would not only reduce the risks associated with experiments, but will also force the researchers to develop safer means of conducting their experiments so that they do not have fatal results on their subjects. Among the principles of the Nuremberg Code is that the researcher should ensure that the degree of risk does not go beyond that which is considered to be the problem that is supposed to be solved (“Trials of War”, 1949). This is especially true of cases where there is an epidemic and the experiment being conducted on human subjects not only fails to work, but makes the problem even worse. In such circumstances, it is essential for a researcher to always put the best interest of the society first before deciding to make use of human subjects because to do otherwise would mean that he would put both the test subject in unnecessary danger while at the same time not doing anything significant to alleviate the problem. A researcher has the responsibility of making sure that the best experiment preparations are made and that adequate facilities are attained so that human subjects can be properly protected. This is especially true of cases where human subjects have a possibility of getting into dangerous situations due to a lack of proper preparations. The researcher should ensure that the comfort as well as safety of the human subject is given the highest priority and should go out of his way to develop a design that reduces the risk of physical harm or death coming on the subject. Such careful preparations ensure that the experiment does not go awry and that its chances of becoming successful are significantly increased. The importance of having only qualified individuals to conduct any form of experiments involving human subjects cannot be underestimated. Involvement of scientifically qualified individuals in the experiment ensures the avoidance of any serious errors and oversights, which might put all of the participants in danger. Qualified personnel are necessary in the provision of the much needed experience as well as the safety precautions which are needed in the development of a successful research process which also keeps the individuals conducting the experiments as well as the subjects safe. All stages of the experiment have to be done in a careful and safe manner, conducted only by qualified people so that there are no risks of the experiment working out unexpectedly. The liberty of human subjects to bring an end to experiments should not be underestimated by the researcher because to disregard this request would mean that the rights of the subjects are being violated (Weindling, 2001). When a subject has reached the maximum physical or mental state that he can endure in the experiment process, the researcher has the obligation of ending the experiment and making sure that the human subject is helped in all ways to recover their status before the experiment began. The root of this requirement in the Nuremberg Code came about as a result of the findings which showed that Nazi scientists tended not to care about the capacity of their subjects to endure their experiments to their conclusion. This almost total disregard for their subjects was the cause of many deaths or mental breakdowns among subjects. Therefore, researchers in the modern world should take care to regard the state of their subjects as well as their requests to end the experiments if these subjects cannot endure them anymore. The researcher in charge of the experiment should always be ready to terminate it at any time especially in situations where there is a risk that its results might not turn out as expected (Shore, 2006). Furthermore, it is important for the researcher to develop an attitude where the safety of the subject remains paramount so that in case there is any danger for the latter, he takes active steps towards the experiment termination. There should also be an observance on the part of the scientist of superior skill and judgment when conducting the experiment because without these, there is likelihood that the experiment will not be successful and might cause grievous harm on the test subject. Therefore, a scientist or researcher always has to be careful in the experiment development and has to ensure that it does not put anyone in harm’s way because without such considerations, there would be no point of subjects taking part in the experiment because of the risks involved. A researcher has to put ethics ahead of any personal ambitions concerning the findings of an experiment and making a decision concerning its termination because this is the only way through which he can make possible the safety of his own as well as the subject’s life. Conclusion The observance of ethics in research involving human subjects has become an essential part of research in the post-war world. The Nuremberg Code is one of the most fundamental code of ethics aimed at ensuring the safety of human subjects as well as the provision of guidelines on how best to conduct experiments. In this way, atrocities and unethical procedures in the scale that was committed on human subjects by Nazi German scientists have come to be greatly reduced in the modern world. References Perlman, D. (2004). Ethics in clinical research: A history of human subject protections and practical implementation of ethical standards. SoCRA Source.37-41 Shore, N. (2006). Re-conceptualizing the Belmont Report: A community-based participatory research perspective. Journal of Community Practice 14(4): 5–26. The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, Department of Health, Education and Welfare. (1978, September 30). The Belmont Report (DHEW pub. no. (OS) 78-0012). Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office. “Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law”. (1949), 2(10), 181-182. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Weindling, P. (2001). The Origins of Informed Consent: The International Scientific Commission on Medical War Crimes, and the Nuremberg Code. Bulletin of the History of Medicine 75(1): 37–71. Read More