In the best-selling book, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks (Skloot, 2010), the author highlights the true story of an African-American woman who died in 1951 from cervical cancer. What makes her story unique is that prior to her death, cells from her tumor were removed and successfully grown in a petri dish. This was the first time scientists were able to successfully replicate cells outside the body, and it is estimated that billions of Lacks’ cells have been used in medical research. However, Henrietta Lacks was never asked for permission to take a sample and her family was never made aware of the widespread use of her cells. Although the culturing of her cells has been pivotal for advancing research, strong ethical concerns later arose about using these cells without patient or family approval.

This week’s readings describe historical examples of unethical research, such as a study of syphilis among African-American men in which treatment was withheld and a study in which live cancer cells were injected into elderly patients. Today, stricter controls that seek to protect study participants are placed on researchers, but breaches still occur. Careful attention must be given toward preventing unethical behavior. In this Discussion, you explore ethical considerations and issues in research.

· Select a current health-related case involving research ethics. (If none come to mind, browse the Internet to familiarize yourself with recent cases.)

· As you review the case that you have selected, reflect on the ethical principles discussed in “What Are the Major Ethical Issues in Conducting Research?” article found in this week’s Learning Resources. Which principles were breached in the case you have identified?

Post a description of the case that you selected and the ethical issues involved. Analyze the ethical principles that were breached by the researchers or organizations in your selected case as well as the possible cause of the breach(es). Suggest how the research might have been conducted differently to avoid or minimize the ethical problems. Discuss how research can be done on sensitive issues while still protecting the rights of the research subjects.

Comment1

Meilaender uses Leon Kass’s words to help us understand the difference between reproduction and procreation. According to Kass, “The premodern Christian English speaking world, impressed with the world as given by a creator, using the term ‘pro-creation.’ We, impressed with the machine and the gross national product, employ a metaphor of the factory, ‘reproduction.” (Engelland, 2015). According to Meilaeder in his reading, he clams that procreation is natural and has some influence when it comes to divine while reproduction is unnatural and it works against God’s plans. Form various research materials; reproduction is a biological way through which human beings reproduce for continuity of the human species. The reproduction means more to the species as it is to the individual. On the other hand, procreation is a process of creating new things of the same kind. 

According to Meilaender, on these two terms, it is a matter of morality. On begetting versus cloning, Meilaender argues on Christianity and theological perspective that shows the value of life and the importance of child as a gift from God and thus it is against the view that the child is a product. According to the reading, the process of creating new life or a marvel of transmission of life father to child is called propagation (Mattes, 2016).Multiplication to proliferation is partially an indication of human opportunity. Conceived, is the correct inverse. It is when something leaves something else existing before it. In this way, any conceived thing or needing to have a source. Indeed, I concur with his description as the definitions justify the readings.  

Comment2

According to Meilaender (2013), procreation is the gift of life given by a Creator while reproduction is the manmade creation of life through artificial or assisted means. Being Begotten has a similar meaning as procreation as it is the “transmission of life from father to son” while to be made is similar to reproduction as it is to be made through artificial means rather than created naturally (Meilaender, 2013). I can understand the descriptions and agree the meaning for each word. However, I have a hard time with the descriptions in the details for them, especially the reproduction. To me, I have seen many parents struggle with infertility and are so joyful when they are told they cannot have children naturally but have options. With the description of children from infertility treatments being an “object” and that the “human worth increasing becomes something that to be achieved rather than the birthright of every child” as Meilaender (2013) puts it does not settle right with me. To me, I view this is a contradiction of the beginning of the book that states that human being is the right of all individuals not matter their state of being.

Write a 1,200-1,500 word analysis of “Case Study: Healing and Autonomy.” In light of the readings, be sure to address the following questions:

1. Under the Christian narrative and Christian vision, what sorts of issues are most pressing in this case study?
2. Should the physician allow Mike to continue making decisions that seem to him to be irrational and harmful to James?
3. According to the Christian narrative and the discussion of the issues of treatment refusal, patient autonomy, and organ donation in the topic readings, how might one analyze this case?
4. According to the topic readings and lecture, how ought the Christian think about sickness and health? What should Mike as a Christian do? How should he reason about trusting God and treating James?

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.

RUBRIC:

Identification of Ethical Issues and Christian Principles and Values

Ethical issues along with Christian principles and values pertaining to the case study are identified. Any apparent tensions between religious autonomy and physician recommendation are acknowledged.

Analysis of Ethical Issues and Christian Principles and Values

The analysis of the application of the Christian Worldview principles regarding the ethical issues is excellent in reaching a viable conclusion. An accurate biblical perspective with detailed interaction with the biblical text regarding medicine is clearly discussed, along with how it relates to the issue of healing.

Thesis Development and Purpose

Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

Argument Logic and Construction

Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

All format elements are correct

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

100 %Total Weightage

  

Chapter 39

A 43-year-old man presents to the clinic you work at for a follow-up blood pressure check accompanied by his 9-year-old daughter. He is noted to still have hypertension (high blood pressure). The physician prescribes an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor.

a.            The 9-year-old daughter asks you how this medication works. How would you explain this to her in a way she can understand?

b.            What might be other suggestions (besides medications) you would make to this patient to help him decrease his blood pressure? Why?

  

Validity in research refers to the extent researchers can be confident that the cause and effect they identify in their research are in fact causal relationships. If there is low validity in a study, it usually means that the research design is flawed and the results will be of little or no value. Four different aspects of validity should be considered when reviewing a research design: statistical conclusion validity, internal validity, construct validity, and external validity. In this Discussion, you consider the importance of each of these aspects in judging the validity of quantitative research.

To prepare:

· Review the information in Chapter 10 of the course text on rigor and validity.

· Read the method section of one of the following quasi-experimental studies (also located in this week’s Learning Resources). Identify at least one potential concern that could be raised about the study’s internal validity.

o Metheny, N. A., Davis-Jackson, J., & Stewart, B. J. (2010). Effectiveness of an aspiration risk-reduction protocol. Nursing Research, 59(1), 18–25.

o Padula, C. A., Hughes, C., & Baumhover, L. (2009). Impact of a nurse-driven mobility protocol on functional decline in hospitalized older adults. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 24(4), 325–331.

o Yuan, S., Chou, M., Hwu, L., Chang, Y., Hsu, W., & Kuo, H. (2009). An intervention program to promote health-related physical fitness in nurses. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18(10), 1,404–1,411.

· Consider strategies that could be used to strengthen the study’s internal validity and how this would impact the three other types of validity.

· Think about the consequences of an advanced practice nurse neglecting to consider the validity of a research study when reviewing the research for potential use in developing an evidence-based practice.

Post the title of the study that you selected and your analysis of the potential concerns that could be raised about the study’s internal validity. Propose recommendations to strengthen the internal validity and assess the effect your changes could have with regard to the other three types of validity. Discuss the dangers of failing to consider the validity of a research study.