Many people have brought up this questions in comments and during class. There are many instances and occasions where doctors have done things to expose people.With Henrietta Locks, her whole life is exposed and so is her family. This brought in general thoughts about exposing people. We know that in celebrity news and gossipy-type news, people are exposed left and right. Even though these people that are exposed are celebrities, it seems as though they are exposed for entertainment.
I'm not trying to say that Henrietta was exposed for entertainment. I do not think that. But when it comes to exposing in the medical field, of not only the patient but their family as well, do you think that medical professionals should be allowed to do that? Or should they be able to keep the patients personal information confidential in these terms? What's your opinion?
And if you think so, do you think that Henrietta's case was exploited for actual scientific research, or for entertainment purposes?
-Courtney O'Donnell
I do not thouroughly believe that Henrietta Lacks was exploited for entertainment reasons. The whole reason the situation is so controversial and is brought up in the media is because her cells were taken without her consent, and her family was not notified. From this outlying issue, her story was brought into the media. I do believe that Gey did want to achieve some recognition as well as a monetary reward, however; for creating a significant breakthrough in medicine; disregarding Henrietta herself, focusing more on his own concern with fame and success, it sort of just turned out to be about Henrietta because of how he obtained these cells.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with your statement of Henrietta Lacks not being used for entertainment. The entertainment value that arose out of this situation was from the people who read these articles based around the HeLa cells. These people would try and find out more about this unknown donor such as the name of the donor, sex, and race. This is common when listening to crimes on the local news. People want to organize an image in their minds on the identity of the suspect. While the example I used is far apart from the intention of my point, I am trying to use the crimes as an example of society trying to find out the identity of the person.
ReplyDeleteI agree as well that Henrietta Lacks was not exploited for entertainment reasons but rather for controversial reasons. Today its almost impossible to release information of medical patients with out consent and if done there is a lot at stake and most people would lose their jobs. Therefore I don't think it's a huge thing to worry about.
ReplyDeleteI think doctors should keep patient information confidential but in this case they never even had consent from Henrietta. I agree that Henrietta was exploited for scientific research not for entertainment reasons. Eventually her real name was known in the media, but the Gey tried hard I think to keep her identity a secret making me believe Gey's intent was for scientific research only.
ReplyDeleteI think it's pretty clear that Henrietta was only needed for her cells and that she wasn't being exploited as entertainment. Her role in the media just added to human beings' natural born sense of curiosity. It's like the elementary school shooting. People just wanted to know who the guy was to see what he looked like. They like to put a face to name.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ryan. I feel that the immortal cells needed to be connected to a persons name and face in someway, and that's what the magazines were looking for in revealing her name. I do not feel that her exploitation was a form of entertainment, but rather just a way for that lingering question to be answered about where the cells originated.
ReplyDeleteWhile I don't believe that Henrietta was exploited for entertainment reasons, I still believe that she was taken advantage of nonetheless. The doctors took her cells and then let her name out into the public. So I think that in this aspect, it was the Doctors jobs to keep the patient's information confidential, instead of succumbing to the needs or wants of the general public.
ReplyDelete