Sunday, February 20, 2011
RACC Discussion Question 2
Assume you are an attorney appointed/hired to defend Dr. Gey. While many of you have criticized Dr. Gey from a 21st century perspective of race, gender and class; you must now present arguments defending him in the context of his era (1940s and 1950s). Specify at least 3 points as the basis of your defense and provide zealous reasoned arguments in defending of Dr. Gey. **(I expect to hear from all of our future lawyers; you may partner up with no more than one other person (your co-counsel) to respond to the question---the DBS faculty will select what we feel was the best argument)** You must respond by Friday, Feb. 25 deadline.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Cloris(counsel) Ida(co-counsel). We will be speaking in the defense of Dr. Gey and giving the 3 points as the basis of our defense with reasoned arguments. The first point is in the 1940s-50s, segregation was enforced. Whites are superior by law and blacks are considered inferior. The Jim Crow laws were state and local laws in the U.S. mandated the racial segregation in all public facilities with a supposedly "separate but equal" status for blacks. In the 1940s-50s, blacks were given access to medical care which other wise they would not be able to get(medical care or medical aid was considered a privilege to blacks, not a right) so their payment for treatment is that whites get to use them in research and scientific studies. That is only right for Dr. Gey to conduct such studies. The next point is that women of African descent has resisted oppression for many years. Black women have fought for inclusion in the women suffrage movement(the right of women to vote and historically includes the economic political reform movement on a equal basis to those for men and without any restrictions or qualifications). But the Jim Crow laws which was enforced hindered black women's suffrage. Dr. Gey saw Henrietta as a woman, a black woman, who should have been submissive to him. The Bible says that wives are to submit themselves to their own husband as they have unto the Lord. Dr. Gey saw himself as her superior being because of his credentials and status in the community, meaning he knew what was best for her. Blacks didn't have a voice and Henrietta being a woman, made her thoughts and opinions not important. Who is she to question his judgement or his rulings? She is a "black" "woman" who knows nothing. The last point is simply blacks doing this for mankind. Because of the uprising of various diseases such as cancer, polio, malaria, yellow fever, ect... Dr Gey felt that it was African Americans duties and rights to "die for a cause." He felt that as long as something good comes from this or something gained(meaning fame for him, recognition of his works/talents, and wealth) it is okay that blacks be used in research. We must remember that Dr. Gey was an educated white man who sought out to cure diseases throughout the world. His motives should not be question because in those times, by law the whites were considered right in their decisions and views and blacks had no voice or thoughts(at least theirs didn't matter).
ReplyDeleteWhile it is easy to simply portray Dr. Gey as a product of his times, I don't think we really know enough about him. Did he treat white women patients differently? We don't see any overtly racial prejudice on his part. The arguments made by Cloris and Ida are interesting, though I'm not clear on the second point. I'll read it again.
ReplyDelete@Douglas, the point we are making is that in those times women were not considered equal to men, more inferior than anything. Simply, women should be submissive to their husbands(men). We made references to the Bible and the woman's suffrage movement to show how it has been a struggle for women through the years. Understand that this is simply our opinion or point of view of how Dr. Gey might have thought about the situation. Today, however, do you feel that women are equal or on the same level as men in all instances or not?
ReplyDeleteThough many will continuously argue that Dr. Gey took advantage of the Lacks family due to the patient's race, gender or class there is however no evidence that the doctor was completely aware of these factors in carrying out his research which was not and has not been initially linked to defined demographic. This therefore means that Dr. Gey treated the cells of Henrietta Lacks like any other collected human cell in his study.
ReplyDeleteHenrietta Lacks' cells were taken by two doctors prior to them being received by Dr. Gey who was first made aware of these cells via Dr. TeLinde who wanted the cells cultured along with others in order to prove that his methods of treating cervical cancer. How do we know that Dr. TeLinde didn't offer these cells to other doctors who also cultured and possibily distributed Henrietta Lacks' cells.
Dr. Gey cultured several thousands cells throughout his study the mere fact Henrietta's cells survived and reproduced independently was a medical phenomena in itself pioneering treatments for several illnesses. And though Dr. Gey is believed to be the one who initially successfully cultured Henrietta Lacks' cell which were offered to him by a fellow physicans. The fact that Henrietta Lack's cells were not originally collected by Dr. Gey there is no way he should be liable for the fact that the family of Henrietta Lacks or Ms. Lacks herself were not adequately informed of the possibilities of her cells being used in current or future studies regarding cervical cancer.
In the era of diseases and sicknesss with no known cure, what is a society to do? You always hear, "I wish that I could find a cure." Well thats exactly what Dr Gey was trying to do. Yes he experimented without the consent of the involved party, but sometimes thats best.You would hate to get someones hopes up for nothing so sometimes silent is the best treatment. What exactly could it hurt? Its simply an experiment taken from a random test on a sick individual.The sick individual needed medical attention and would have tests ran on them regardless. The patient was simplky seeking medical attention. Dr Gey was simply looking for a cure to help his patient and other patients that came along with the same diagnosis. Doctors have been experimenting on patients since the beginning of time and just once when an experiment proves to be right we have all this publicity? What about all the other experiments that proved to be wrong.We didnt make that a public fact. "HeLa" could have possibly been for Henrietta Lacks. Who is to say that they were not? In defending Dr Gey I say that his actions were legit. He was simply looking to help and save another life without hurting or disappointing the community. Cancer is something serious and we need all the help, research, and cures that we can possibly get.All we see is the wring in Dr Gey's actions, but what about the possible rights?
ReplyDeleteDr. Gey is a medical researcher and did not want to alarm Henrietta Lacks or her family because by them being colored they would not understand the details of the experiment.The 1940's and 1950's was a time where African American were treated as second class citizen. He felt as if he was doing her a favor by treating her for the illness. He felt that the family did not have any concept of the disease and did not feel that they needed to know the the illness.
ReplyDeleteIn agreeance with miss Callaway, Dr, Gey was only looking to benefit society as a whole. If there is any evidence of a cure to save millions of lives it is only right that we secure it. No Lacks was not informed on this medical breakthrough but if she was informed further studies would have ceased. Also. Mrs. Lacks was receiving free healthcare so the trade for services can be considered equal. In Gey's defense hewas only doing his job. By signing the waver before being treated, Lacks agreed to allow Gey to do whatever was necessary to aiding her condition. This includes in depth research of her own cells that could have ended up saving her own life. Out of fear and ignorance Lacks would have refused research that was beneficial to her. To someone looking from the outside Gey appears to be the bad guy but in context and in doing what was best at the time for medicine as a whole, Gey is a saviour.
ReplyDeleteWhile the plaintifff argue that it was unethical that Dr.Gey to test on Mrs.Lack cells he was authorize to do so when she was admitted in to the facility for care.The patient consent form gives Dr.Gey permission to run as many test to keep her alive while the plaintiffs are arguing that she was dead inactuality she was alive as her cells are alive Mrs.Lack is alive .Many times people go into a comatose state and they brain dead but doctors can't pronounce them dead until every cell in their body is dead.Also Gey was protecting the community if they had found out what was really transpired would have cause a riot between the African Amercian and Caucasion community.If Dr.Gey should be accused of anything it should of trying to keep the peace between two communities.
ReplyDeleteAs Jasmine Callaway's co-counsel I am backing up her argument. Dr. Gey was just trying to benefit the community by trying to find a cure. Yes, he should have went about it in a different way, but we have to look past the possible mistreatment or wrong message that we got from him at first. It has to be a positive vibe we got to look at for this situation. He did it because he cared of what could have possibly happened by expecting the worse!
ReplyDeleteI feel that Dr. Gey can’t be held accountable for his decision. Dr. Howard did the dirty work. Dr. Gey merely suggested to Dr. Howard to take some of Henrietta’s good cells when she came in for treatment. Dr. Gey and his team did many scrapping of women cells it is just a miracle that he found someone with great cells that could reproduce on their own. Dr. Gey probably felt that collecting the cells for his procedure would be a break threw for his medical research. By Dr. Gey performing a successful procedure he has been noted as a successful doctor.
ReplyDeleteThe Law states that there are two situations where the truth can be withheld from the patient. The one situation is if a physician feels as though the information gathered will further harm the patients mental or physical state. An example would be depression or cause the patient to go into shock. The physician must have an overwhelming amount of evidence that proves this instead of just going off of a hypothetical assumption. Physicians have the obligation of confidentiality, which means that any information about a patient is not to be discussed with any interested parties, that includes the family. Physicians have to go by the doctor patient ethics.
ReplyDeleteAs stated above, there is a consent form to be signed when an individual goes in for a treatment of any kind or strain of disease. Of course whether or not with your acknowledgement there will be tests done on your DNA after your presence. That's how doctors test for other possible diseases and viruses. Necessarily speaking, what is to happen if there is an acknowledgement of a possible breakthrough on using cells? That would lead to pressure on the doctor which may lead to them not performing to the best of their abilities.
ReplyDeleteSociety is lucky for the actions of Dr. Gey, because without those cells, we as a society today would not have been as advanced in the cancer research.
The revenue for the research should remain anonymous, because that money is currently being used to fund hospitals on their medical research. Searching for cures is a very expensive process, expensive as in time consuming, number of patients and money. Without the money from the "miracle cells", how else is there to fund the research? Taxes, Extended Furlough maybe?
Herietta's lifestyle (incest) is not accepted anymore in most states. This lifestyle led to her genetic makeup anyway. Due to her being the only person of that time with those genetics in a society of millions. Our chances of finding another with similar cells like hers in today's society is impossible.
Jasmine Walker (counsel)In Dr. Gey's defense the sample was just a sample, it wasn't taking the expectation that it was going to grow at the rate at which it grew. Mrs. Lacks was not single out for her cells, it was a random sample and her cells just happen to be the ones that grew outside the body. Dr. Gey had no way of knowing that her cells would survive, nor did he have any contact with Mrs. Lacks. He was just doing his job as he had always had done. When samples were taken at the hospital from a patient and sent to the labs for testing there were not, nor is there today, a limit on what testing can be done to the samples, who can do the testing on the samples or that if testing is done and something comes out of it that the person or person's family who the samples came from should be informed about the findings or any additional testing done on the samples. Mrs. Lacks was a patient and had the findings lead to saving her life no one would contest to Dr. Gey's use or access to the cell samples in question. I would also like to add that the continuous growth of the cells did not require Mrs. Lacks' actual body or her body fluids so who is to say that the additional cells grown from the original cells are of actual claim to Henrietta or the Lacks' family?
ReplyDeleteAs Jasmine Walkers' (co counsel) I agree with her fully. Dr. Gey was just trying to solve a continuous problem. He had no contact with Mrs. Lacks and as any doctor would he was searching for a relevant cure. I also agree that no establishment has been made on what tests can be done to samples. As a physican doctor Dr. Gey was aiming for a positive cause in hoping to save a life, and in his defense I would say his actions were for the best.
Montrel Preston( counsel) and Marcus Harp( co-counsel). In the case of Henrietta Lacks, Dr. Gey was "not" her doctor; he was a researcher. Meaning, he was a scientist that devoted him self to scientific investigation or inquiry which he did with cells that were "given" to him. Now some might make the argument of decit. However, if there is any it rest at the foot of the doctor. Not to mention the consent form. Therefore, if Dr. Gey is guilty of anything, it is for being passionate about finding a cure for humanity.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Dr. Gey's actions were right to a certain existent. In that day in time it was so impertative to find a cure and even in today's society. I believe He did what he had to do for the greater good of society. He had the opportunity to use One person and that one person could help save millions. In my opinion he made the best decision.
ReplyDeleteI agree whole hardly with Shardae.Using Mrs. Lacks has helped the world. Everything starts fom somewhere and without that research we would be so far behind.
ReplyDeleteEven though it may seem like Dr. Gey's research was unethical and racially based he did was necessary to help man kind as a whole. It was a step towards finding a cure for a sickly disease. Sometimes the sacrifice of one person is for the best interest of man kind.
ReplyDeleteThe ends justify the means in this case. While it may be true that the actions of Dr. Gey appear unethical, it would be wrond to discout the good that came from his work. Many more cells were cultured in his efforts long before the cells of Mrs. Lacks were used which is evidence that Dr. Gey was not promoting some hidden agenda by using the cells, he was simply trying to do the kind of work that would have long term benefits for people all over the world in the long term. To find Dr, Gey guilty of wrongdoing would be to discredit EVERY scientific breakthrough that has happened as a result of this work over the years. Where would the justice be in that?
ReplyDeleteMyself, Mr. Foster, and Mr. Curry have come to the conclusion that it is possible to defend Dr. Gey as others such as Ms. Cloris have done by saying that during those times, being used for research purposes can be seen as a form of payment for the treatment that blacks received. But furthermore, even by current legal standards, possession is nine tenths of the law, so once the sample had been removed from Ms. Lacks, how much say so does she actually have over the sample. We highly doubt that people take issue with what happens to their hair when it is swept from the floors of barbershops and hair salons.
ReplyDeleteDr. Gey acted lawfully and relatively ethically in the context of his time. The main reason I feel that way is because at the time African Americans were commonly used as test subjects especially in the medical field. Also at this time the rights and privacy of African American women were valued in society. Also it was standard at this time to take samples of genetic information without immediate consent
ReplyDeleteI concur with Ms. Calloway in that Dr. Gey was doing his job in trying to cure Henrietta's cancer. The fact that her cells were taken for future experiments wad Dr. Gey taking his hypacratic oath to heart in protecting his client's privacy but it may be seen as him using it to his advantage. There is a constant cry for help in the community for a cure for cancer. He was simply responding to this cry for help instead of delivering false hope as most doctors did. So, in effect, we cannot fault him for doing his job. In deeper analysis, it wasn't as if he was using her as a guinea pig from the start. Her cells were going to be tested and cultured from the start to find abnormalities. In her case, the cells continued living.
ReplyDeleteDr. George Gey and his team of researchers wanted to grow cancer cells in a laboratory. They believed scientists could study this illness to understand its causes and find a cure. The cells of Henrietta Lacks survived and grew faster than any other cells he and his team had ever encountered. He began giving the cells to researchers across the country, free of charge. Soon, scientists in labs around the world were using these cells. The production of this line of cells by companies will eventually grow into a multi-million dollar industry. Not only will my client profit from these cells, but the entire world will. There is no wrong in science. What does the most good for the greatest amount of people is just. These cells could help us cure many diseases, medicines, and chemicals. So, the only guilt my client has is of not finding immortal cells sooner; that which he had no control over.
ReplyDeleteAs Dr. Gey’s attorney, I can assure you that he hasn’t done anything illegal. Although I feel for Mrs. Lacks and her family, I believe this is just an attempt for a poor, colored family to make some easy money. The Lackses complain that Dr. Gey and Hopkins hospital was not given the permission to take Henrietta’s cell. I would like to present my first article to the jury. What you are looking at is, indeed, a consent form stating “I hereby give consent to the staff of the John Hopkins Hospital to perform any operative procedures” and underneath it you will see the signature of a Henrietta Lacks. Let’s break down the previous statement shall we? It states that she does, indeed, consent to any operative procedures. In this case one of those operative procedures were removing slivers of her cervix, both healthy and infected. This piece of evidence shows that the cells were not taken, and were, instead, given to the hospital to be given to Dr. Gey. Next, there is no law prohibiting the experimentation on human “remains”. Once part of the human leaves the body, it is free to whoever wants it. Therefore once the cells left Henrietta it was a free for all, on a first come first serve basis. Lastly, if we look at the Moore vs Golde case, which is very similar to this one, we will see that in fact the judge, in the Court of California, ruled in favor of Golde (the doctor), which should have set a precedent for all future similar cases. Another thing to keep in mind is that Dr. Gey’s discovery, along with those who he shared the HeLa cells with, made so many remarkable discoveries and cures and has helped millions all over the world. So, honorable judge, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, shouldn’t we, instead of accusing this man of some bizarre wrongdoing, be praising him as a medical revolutionary and hero?
ReplyDeleteAfter realizing the significance of Henrietta Lacks’ cells, Dr. Gey used the code name HeLa, but deliberately misleads the public and her family saying that HeLa stood for Helen Lane. Dr. Gey did this because he was concerned Henrietta’s family might sue over the use of her cells. Dr. Gey’s actions reflect the systematic mistreatment and discrimination of African-Americans by the US medical system and establishment. “Since at least the 1800s, black oral history has been filled with tales of “night doctors” who killed black people for research” (Skloot 165). It was okay back then for researchers to steal poor blacks because no one had the money to go looking for them and the police didn’t care either. The black children had to be on the porch before it got dark and they knew researchers from John Hopkins were out at night time. “I’m telling you, I lived here in the fifties when they got Henrietta, and we weren’t allowed to go anywhere near Hopkins” (Skloot165). Hospitals were known to have taken so many people to do outrageous things and sometimes they were returned and other times they just went missing. Dr. Gey saw Henrietta as an opportunity to create something new. She was a beautiful colored girl with no money who was in need of help. With her sexually transmitted infection and her cancerous tumor he knew he could create something new. I believe he initially wanted to find out what was wrong with her and help her, but when he discovered the constant growing cells that became his main focus. “To discourage slaves from meeting or escaping, slave owners told tales of gruesome research done on black bodies, then covered themselves in in white sheets and crept around at night, posing as spirits coming to infect black people with disease or to steal them for research” (Skloot 166). This was how the Ku Klux Klan came about back in the day because the white people were out to harm the African American Race. Around the time Henrietta’s cells were illegally taken, there weren’t too many people of color who had money. Dr. Gey knew of this and used it to his advantage. He also saw an advantage in Jim Crow laws and took off with it. Bobbette said that they weren’t allowed around John Hopkins. After the incident with Henrietta everyone understood why.
ReplyDeleteWhen you think about the time frame in which this situation happened, you have to look at the laws around that time. He took her cells, yes, but what about his intentions behind what he did? He had good reason for what he did. To his surprise and to others, her cells grew. So what is the real crime? Distributing them so other doctors and other scientists can save lives.
ReplyDeleteI think Dr. Gey should be held accountable for his actions, because he knew exactly what he were doing and never gave the patients are clue. gey tried getting cells from several other individuals but never struck gold until he met mrs.lacks.
ReplyDelete