Tuskegee Syphilis Study with consent

WI the doctors who prefromed the Tuskegee Syphilis Study recieved constent before conducting the experiment? Say they find African Americans who already have the disease, or actually say "Can we infect you?"
 
I think one is different then the other:

Studying those already ill is not problematic.

It is, however, usually not possible to consent to assault. Whether this is an exception seems problematic. I should note I know of one case by the British House of Lord the held participating in consensual bondage activity would make one liable to assault; I cannot see why a doctor injecting someone with a disease is any different.

Now whether experiment should be permissible is problematic. I have reservations and would suggest such an act violates medical ethics.
 
Right but what you speak of is common thought now, back then it was done was considered the most effective manner of conducting research. It was not until the 1970's the the Tuskegee project ended, and that was by a single doctor new to the project objecting to it, and bringing it to public attention. The Stanford prison experiment, Project MKULTRA, Stateville Penitentiary Malaria Study, Oklahoma sonic boom tests, and many others all had various physical, social, psychological, and economic effects yet each experiment was conducted on those who volunteered.

So think of this in terms of the 1930's: eugenics is considered a science, testing humans is effective, and dozens of other things of why the ends justify the means (don't think this, but people saw the world in such a matter back then). If the experiment was based upon the exact same test, yet consent was given what would be different?
 
Top