To test new medications and drugs and their working on Syphilis, and in order to know more about Syphilis, it was necessary to carry out experiments where treatment was withheld from the African American population.People with Syphilis, people involved in the study, the researchers, general population were the stakeholders involved.Facts: The Syphilis study was conducted in Macon County. In this, the United States Public Health service used poor black men in the study, and had to withhold treatment for some of them in order to study the disease progression on people who did not receive the treatment.
The research participants were not informed that they would not be given treatment and that they were part of a study. They had agreed to be freely examined and treated and believed they were getting treatment. Also when a new treatment to cure their disease was available, the change of drugs available to treat them was not informed to them.
Standards: It is ethical in research to inform the participants about the study completely and then obtained the consent before conducting the research. In this case, adequate information was not shared with the participants and they were misinformed. Secondly, when some variables of the study changed, once again it was ethical to inform the participants of the availability of penicillin but this information was withheld for the sake of learning more about the disease.
In seeking knowledge about the disease, black participants were not shared proper information with as is required under duty or deontology.
The research participants did not receive their needed drugs because of the test design.Ethical concerns in research such as consent have to be followed strictly.Ensure that all participants of research are given informed consent.
As a protagonist of the decisions made in Bhopal, the management of the safety controls and everything would cost the company a lot. Breaches of chemical spill similar to the one that happened in the Carbide plant affects only a part of the stakeholders, but the maintenance and governance changes are quite high. As the management handling the issues, I would be justified in ensuring a cost balance was achieved.
In the case of the Tuskegee experiment, it can be said that the participants were helping the larger society. As the research conducting the experiment, my justification would be that the participants were monitored and no harm was done intentionally to the participant.