The prisoner as model organism: malaria research at Stateville Penitentiary

Nathaniel Comfort

Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences
Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences

Abstract

In a military-sponsored research project begun during the Second World War, inmates of the Stateville Penitentiary in Illinois were infected with malaria and treated with experimental drugs that sometimes had vicious side effects. They were made into reservoirs for the disease and they provided a food supply for the mosquito cultures. They acted as secretaries and technicians, recording data on one another, administering malarious mosquito bites and experimental drugs to one another, and helping decide who was admitted to the project and who became eligible for early parole as a result of his participation. Thus, the prisoners were not simply research subjects; they were deeply constitutive of the research project. Because a prisoner’s time on the project was counted as part of his sentence, and because serving on the project could shorten one’s sentence, the project must be seen as simultaneously serving the functions of research and punishment. Michel Foucault wrote about such ‘mixed mechanisms’ in his Discipline and punish. His shining example of such a ‘transparent’ and subtle style of punishment was the panopticon, Jeremy Bentham’s architectural invention of prison cellblocks arrayed around a central guard tower. Stateville prison was designed on Bentham’s model; Foucault featured it in his own discussion. This paper, then, explores the power relations in this highly idiosyncratic experimental system, in which the various roles of model organism, reagent, and technician are all occupied by sentient beings who move among them fluidly. This, I argue, created an environment in the Stateville hospital wing more panoptic than that in the cellblocks. Research and punishment were completely interpenetrating, and mutually reinforcing.


Comfort N. The prisoner as model organism: malaria research at Stateville Penitentiary. Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci. 2009;40(3):190-203. doi:10.1016/j.shpsc.2009.06.007

Conscientious objection to termination of pregnancy: The competing rights of patients and nurses

Roslyn Kane

Nursing Management
Nursing Management

Abstract
Aims:
To highlight the potential difficulties in the management of staff with a conscientious objection to abortion, in light of expanding role of nurses.

Background: Recent years have seen changes in the provision of abortion services. Medical procedures are now gaining popularity and some areas are seeing the integration of outpatient clinics into ward settings. This may involve nurses being required to provide care to women undergoing termination of pregnancy, which may not have previously been within their remit. This has implications for staff with a conscientious objection.

Methods: A review of the academic literature.

Results: The advent of medical abortion has led to changes in the way in which abortion services are provided which in turn has re-ignited the debate of the competing rights of nurses with a conscientious objection and those of the patient accessing abortion services.

Conclusions: This extended role of nurses creates challenges for staff working in clinical areas offering termination of pregnancy and these are further compounded when staff have expressed a conscientious objection to abortion.

Implications for Nursing Management: Managers face new challenges in achieving the fine balance between the rights of staff with a conscientious objection to abortion and women accessing abortion services.


Kane R. Conscientious objection to termination of pregnancy: The competing rights of patients and nurses. J Nurs Manag. 2009 Sep 24;17(7):907-912.

Unethical Protection of Conscience: Defending the Powerful against the Weak

Bernard M Dickens

American Medical Association Journal of Ethics
American Medical Association Journal of Ethics

Extract
In protecting and privileging health care professionals who withhold information that their patients depend upon, the provisions reduce health care professionals to the status of self-serving traders in an unequal market who may take advantage of those obliged or unwise enough to trust them and rely on their integrity. The provisions underscore the challenge that conscientious objection poses to health care professionalism [8]. To allow physicians to deny or frustrate a patient’s rights of conscience by enforcing their own through nonreferral, as the new regulations do, is unethical. It is ethically justifiable to be intolerant of religious or other fundamentalist intolerance.


Dickens BM. Unethical Protection of Conscience: Defending the Powerful against the Weak. Am Med Ass J Ethics. 2009;11(9):725-729.

Physicians’ beliefs about conscience in medicine: a national survey

Ryan E Lawrence, Farr A Curlin

Academic Medicine
Academic Medicine

Abstract
PURPOSE
: To explore physicians’ beliefs about whether physicians sometimes have a professional obligation to provide medical services even if doing so goes against their conscience, and to examine associations between physicians’ opinions and their religious and ethical commitments.

METHOD: A survey was mailed in 2007 to a stratified random sample of 1,000 U.S. primary care physicians, selected from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. . . .

RESULTS: The response rate was 51% (446/879 delivered questionnaires). Forty-two percent and 22% believed they are never and sometimes, respectively, obligated to do what they personally believe is wrong, and 36% agreed with both statements. Physicians who are more religious are more likely to believe that physicians are never obligated to do what they believe is wrong (58% and 31% of those with high and low intrinsic religiosity, respectively; multivariate odds ratio, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.2-7.2). Those with moral objections to any of three controversial practices were more likely to hold that physicians should never do what they believe is wrong.

CONCLUSION: A substantial minority of physicians do not believe there is ever a professional obligation to do something they personally believe is wrong.


Lawrence RE, Curlin FA. Physicians’ beliefs about conscience in medicine: a national survey.. Acad Med. 2009;84(9):1276-1282.

The Attitude of Flemish Palliative Care Physicians to Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide

Bert Broeckaert, Joris Gielen, Trudie Van Iersel, Stef Van Den Branden

Ethical Perspectives
Ethical Perspectives

Abstract
Surveys carried out among palliative care physicians have shown that most participants do not support euthanasia and assisted suicide. Belgium, however, is one of the few countries in the world in which voluntary euthanasia is allowed by law. The potential influence of this legal dimension thus warranted a study of the attitudes of Belgian palliative care physicians toward euthanasia and assisted suicide. . . .The majority of the physicians favour legalisation on assisted suicide. There is no significant association between the euthanasia clusters and attitudes toward assisted suicide. We conclude that although most Flemish palliative care physicians agree that there may be circumstances in which a euthanasia request is justified, they also strongly believe in the effects of good palliative care and want the ‘palliative filter’ to be included in the law on euthanasia. Religion and worldview are an important factor determining attitudes towards euthanasia.


Broeckaert B, Gielen J, Iersel TV, Branden SVD. The Attitude of Flemish Palliative Care Physicians to Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide. Ethical Perspectives. 2009;16(3):311-335.

Federal provider conscience regulation: Unconscionable

Robert F Card

Journal of Medical Ethics
Journal of Medical Ethics

Abstract
This paper argues that the provider conscience regulation recently put into place in the USA is misguided. The rule is too broad in the scope of protection it affords, and its conception of what constitutes assistance in the performance of an objectionable procedure reveals that it is unworkable in practice. Furthermore, the regulation wrongly treats refusal of other reproductive services as on a par with conscientious objection to participation in abortion. Finally, the rule allows providers to refuse even to discuss “objectionable” options with patients and serves to protect discriminatory refusals of medical care. For all of these reasons, this regulation is unwise.


Card RF. Federal provider conscience regulation: Unconscionable. J Med Ethics. 2009;35(8):471-472.

Plan B and the Doctrine of Double Effect

Rebecca Stangl

The Hastings Center Report
The Hastings Center Report

Extract
An appeal to the doctrine of double effect supposes that the end aimed at is morally good. I claim that women who use emergency contraception need only intend the contraceptive effect of the medication, and not any possible abortifacient effect it may have. If one denies that even the former is a permissible end, then the doctrine of double effect makes no difference.


Stangl R. Plan B and the Doctrine of Double Effect. Hastings Center Report. 2009 Jul-Aug;39(4):21-5.

The Pharmacist’s Obligations to Patients: Dependent or Independent of the Physician’s Obligations?

Jason V Altilio

The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics
The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics

Journal Extract
It has been 40 years since the seminal papers on pharmacy’s status as a profession sparked debate about the pharmacist’s role in health care, yet the questions they raised are just as poignant today as they were then. The issue of pharmacy’s status as a profession and its role in health care has again been brought into question, albeit in a roundabout manner, through discussions over the pharmacist’s right to refrain from dispensing emergency contraception. The key to understanding the contemporary pharmacist’s role as part of the health care team, as well as the pharmacist’s alleged right to refrain from dispensing emergency contraception, is to examine a situation that almost every contemporary pharmacist experiences.


Altilio JV. The Pharmacist’s Obligations to Patients: Dependent or Independent of the Physician’s Obligations? J Law Med Ethics. 2009;37(2):358-368.

Belgian euthanasia law: a critical analysis

Raphael Cohen-Almagor

Journal of Medical Ethics
Journal of Medical Ethics

Abstract
Some background information about the context of euthanasia in Belgium is presented, and Belgian law on euthanasia and concerns about the law are discussed. Suggestions as to how to improve the Belgian law and practice of euthanasia are made, and Belgian legislators and medical establishment are urged to reflect and ponder so as to prevent potential abuse.


Cohen-Almagor R. Belgian euthanasia law: a critical analysis. J Med Ethics. 2009;35(7):436-439.

Rights to emergency contraception

Edith Weisberg, Ian S Fraser

International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics
International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics

Abstract
Emergency contraception (EC) provides women with a safe means of preventing pregnancy following unprotected sexual intercourse or potential contraceptive failure, and is accepted as a legitimate method of fertility control. The right of women to access EC, along with other contraceptive methods, needs to be affirmed. The consequences of unintended pregnancy are serious, imposing appreciable burdens on children, women, men, and families. Every child has the right to be a wanted child and not enter this world because its mother was denied access to EC. For maximum effectiveness, barriers to access must be removed. It is essential that EC pills are available over-the-counter with no minimum age for access. There is a tension between the rights of women to access EC without medical or legal intervention and the rights of providers who have a conscientious objection to provision on religious or moral grounds. The principles of autonomy, non-maleficence, and beneficence all weigh in favor of the rights of a woman faced with the possibility of an unintended pregnancy to unrestricted access to EC against providers whose religious views are opposed to this.


Weisberg E, Fraser IS. Rights to emergency contraception. Int J Gynec Obstet. 2009 Jun 18;106(2):160-163.