DOCSLIB.ORG

Research Involving Children: Appendix to Report and Recommendations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Research Involving Children: Appendix to Report and Recommendations APPENDIX TO REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Research Involving Children THE NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS OF BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH DHEW PUBLICATION NO. (OS) 77-0005 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 This Appendix contains papers, reports and other materials that were reviewed by the Commission during its deliberations on re- search involving children. NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS OF BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION Kenneth John Ryan, M.D., Chairman Chief of Staff Boston Hospital for Women Joseph V. Brady, Ph.D. Karen Lebacqz, Ph.D. Professor of Behavioral Biology Associate Professor of Christian Ethics John Hopkins University Pacific School of Religion Robert E. Cooke, M.D. David W. Louisell, J.D. President Professor of Law Medical College of Pennsylvania University of California at Berkeley Dorothy I. Height Donald W. Seldin, M.D. President Professor and Chairman National Council of Negro Women, Inc. Department of Internal Medicine University of Texas at Dallas Albert R. Jonsen, Ph.D. Eliot Stellar, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Bioethics Provost of the University and University of California at San Francisco Professor of Physiological Psychology University of Pennsylvania Patricia King, J.D. Robert H. Turtle, LL.B. Associate Professor of Law Attorney Georgetown University Law Center VomBaur, Coburn, Simmons & Turtle Washington, DC. NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS OF BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH COMMISSION STAFF PROFESSIONAL STAFF SUPPORT STAFF Michael S. Yesley, J.D. Pamela L. Driscoll Staff Director Arlene Line Barbara Mishkin, M.A. Assistant Staff Director Marie D. Madigan Duane Alexander, M.D. Coral M. Nydegger Pediatrics Erma L. Pender Tom L. Beauchamp, Ph.D. Philosophy Lee A. Calhoun, M.A. Political Science Bradford H. Gray, Ph.D. SPECIAL CONSULTANTS Sociology Miriam Kelty, Ph.D. Robert J. Levine, M.D. Psychology Francis Pizzulli, J.D. Bonnie M. Lee Administrative Assistant Stephen Toulmin, Ph.D. James J. McCartney, M.A., M.S. Research Assistant Betsy Singer Public Information Officer TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Research Involving Children . Survey Research Center 2. Law of Informed Consent in Human Experimentation: Children. George J. Annas Leonard H. Glantz Barbara F. Katz 3. The Ethics of Non-Therapeutic Clinical Research on Children Proxy Consent in the Medical Context: The Infant as Person . William G. Bartholome 4. The Competence and Freedom of Children to Make Choices Regarding Participation in Biomedical and Behavioral Research . Lucy Rau Ferguson 5. Rights, Duties, and Experimentation on Children: A Critical Response to Worsfold and Bartholome. Stanley Hauerwas 6. National Minority Conference on Human Experimentation. Conference Papers! Children and the Institutionalized Mentally Infirm . Henry W. Foster, Jr. Children and the Institutionalized Mentally Infirm. Crystal A. Kuykendall Resolution and Recommendations of the Workshop on Children 7. Responsibility in Investigations on Human Subjects, excerpt from the Report of the British Medical Research Council 8. Ethical Standards for Research with-Children, Society for Research in Child Development 9. Protection of Human Subjects, Policies and Proced- ures, Department of Health, Education and Wel- fare, Federal Register, Volume 38, No. 221, Part 11, November 16, 1973 10. Guidelines for the Ethical Conduct of Studies to Evaluate Drugs in Pediatric Populations, American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Drugs, 1977 11. Additional Readings 1 RESEARCH INVOLVING CHILDREN Survey Research Center University of Michigan Arnold S. Tannenbaum, Ph.D. and Robert A. Cooke, Ph.D., Principal Investigators Contract No. N01-HU-6-2110 Table of Contents page Summary of Findings . 2 Acknowledgements . 4 I. Types of Research . 6 II. Selection of Research Subjects . 9 III. Risks and Benefits of Research . 11 IV. Informed Consent . 15 V. Consent Forms . 20 VI, Subjects' and Proxies' Perceptions of Research . 23 VII. The Attitudes and Suggestions of Investigators, Subjects, and Proxies 28 Appendix . 33 1-1 Research Involving Children The data of this report have been obtained through interviews with 471 research investigators who have engaged in research involving children and. with 144 children-subjects or their proxies. These projects come from our sample of 61 institutions having general assurance of compliance with DREW regulations for protection of human subjects. The research investigators who have responded to our interviews are approximately 75 percent of the total number of such persons who were initially drawn in our sample. The representa- tion of research investigators in our final sample corresponds reasonably well to our initial design. (A more precise statement concerning the reliability of all samples in the study will be presented in the final report.) The final sample of subjects, however, does not correspond well to our design, in part because some institutions did not allow access to subjects and some investiga- tors were unable or unwilling to undertake the additional effort necessary to arrange our contact with subjects. We cannot claim, therefore, to have a representative sample of subjects or proxies. We nonetheless present data in this report obtained from subjects or proxies in order to illustrate the reactions of some of these persons to the research in which they participated. Projects differ from one another in the percent of subjects who were children. This report presents data furnished by investigators for all projects in which at least 25 percent of the subjects were under 19 years of age. Twenty eight percent of all of the projects that passed through our sample of IRB's during the period of July 1, 1974 to June 30, 1975 met this criterion (Table 1.1). In addition, we discuss data from all interviews taken with children or their proxies, not just those involved in projects in which at least 25 percent of the subjects were under age 19. The report is divided into seven sections. The first describes the types 1-2 of research involving children in a variety of institutional settings. The second concerns selection of subjects. The third section describes the risks and benefits of research as reported by researchers. The fourth section discusses informed consent and the fifth reviews the comprehensiveness and comprehensibility of consent forms used in research involving children. The sixth section discusses subjects' and proxies' perceptions of the research process. A seventh section presents the suggestions and opinions of investi- gators and some subjects/proxies. Accompanying the report is an appendix which presents a large number of tables, most of which are summarized in the report. Summary of Findings Projects that included 25 percent or more children represent about a quarter of all of the research that passed through review boards between July 1974 and June 1975. Fourteen percent of this research was reviewed by boards at children's hospitals and 52 percent by boards at medical schools, hospitals (other than children's) and other biomedical research centers. The remaining 34 percent was reviewed at universities (not including medical schools) and, to a lesser extent, at institutions for the mentally infirm and at behavioral research institutions. Approximately half of the projects involving children were primarily biomedical. Behavioral research accounts for about 40 percent of the research,. and the remaining small percentage entailed secondary analyses. Patients served as subjects in most of the projects reviewed at children's hospitals, medical schools, and other biomedical institutions. Patients also participated in about a third of the projects reviewed at universities (without medical schools) and at other behavioral research centers. In a large majority of projects, investigators reported that subjects were selected because of a specific condition or characteristic. 1-3 Most of the research, according to investigators, was designed primarily to benefit subjects directly or to benefit in the future persons with psycho- logical or medical conditions similar to those of the subjects. Almost a third of the projects were designed primarily for other purposes such as contributing to scientific knowledge. In approximately 70 percent of this latter group of projects, subjects were selected because they had a particular condition or characteristic. According to investigators, the changes most frequently requested by review committees concerned procedures for obtaining consent, occurring in- about a quarter of the projects. Consent procedures for secondary analyses were more likely to elicit recommendations for change than were procedures for other types of studies, the more frequent change here being the requirement that written consent be obtained from subjects. Oral and/or written consent was obtained in almost all projects in which children participated. Almost all of the projects from children's hospitals and about two thirds at other places employed proxy consent. Parents, relatives, and legal guardians were the most frequent proxies. Most investigators felt that proxy consent protected subjects "very well" or "fairly well," but a small percent indicated otherwise. Written consent forms were used in almost all research in children's hospitals end in about three quarters of the projects in other institutions. The purpose and procedures of the research were mentioned
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Informed Consent and Shared Decision Making in EBM
    3 Informed Consent and shared decision making in EBM 3.1 ‘Informed consent’ in regular medical practice ‘Consent’ as it is understood in the medical context has to be asked from the pa- tient and is the explicit agreement to waive a right to certain rules and norms which are normally expected in the treatment of other people and of ourselves as patients. Every surgical procedure would, without consent from the patient, be legally un- derstood as assault and battery and the physician could be prosecuted for perform- ing it. ‘Informed consent’ therefore in its most simple form means that the patient has received a good explanation about a medical procedure, understands what is happening to him or her and then can make an informed choice to accept or refuse, in the latter case the so called ‘informed refusal.167 In order to give ‘informed con- sent the patient has to be capable of understanding the information given by the physician. He or she must be competent to decide and to give consent voluntarily without being coerced by any means into giving consent.168 ‘Autonomy’ of the patient, hereby equated with ‘person’ plays the overarching role in ‘informed con- sent.’ A competent person who exercises autonomy will have the final say about their own life. ‘Autonomy’ itself is a contested term in the philosophy of science and interpretations therefore vary. According to Dworkin, “Liberty (positive or negative) ... dignity, integrity, individuality, independence, responsibility and self knowledge ... self assertion ... critical reflection ... freedom from obligation ... ab- sence of external causation ... and knowledge of one’s own interests.”169 all fall under the definition of autonomy.
    [Show full text]
  • Presentation Abstracts
    Eighth Annual Western Michigan University Medical Humanities Conference Conference Abstracts Hosted by the WMU Medical Humanities Workgroup and the Program in Medical Ethics, Humanities, and Law, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine September 13-14, 2018 Our Sponsors: Western Michigan University Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine, WMU Center for the Study of Ethics in Society, WMU Department of Philosophy Ethics After Error: Malpractice, Mistrust, and the Limits of Medical Moral Repair Ben Almassi, PhD Division of Arts & Letters Governors State University Abstract: One limitation of medical ethics modelled on ideal moral theory is its relative silence on the aftermath of medical error – that is, not just on the recognition and avoidance of injustice, wrongdoing, or other such failures of medical ethics, but how to respond given medical injustice or wrongdoing. Ideally, we would never do each other wrong; but given that inevitably we do, as fallible and imperfect agents we require non-ideal ethical guidance. For such non-ideal moral contexts, I suggest, Margaret Walker’s account of moral repair and reparative justice presents powerful hermeneutical and practical tools toward understanding and enacting what is needed to restore moral relationships and moral standing in the aftermath of injustice or wrongdoing, tools that might be usefully extended to medical ethics and error specifically. Where retributive justice aims to make injured parties whole and retributive justice aims to mete out punishment, reparative justice “involves the restoration or reconstruction of confidence, trust, and hope in the reality of shared moral standards and of our reliability in meeting and enforcing them.” Medical moral repair is not without its challenges, however, in both theory and practice: standard ways of holding medical professionals and institutions responsible for medical error and malpractice function retributively and/or restitutively, either giving benign inattention to patient-practitioner relational repair or impeding it.
    [Show full text]
  • Tuskegee and the Health of Black Men
    Tuskegee and the Health of Black Men Marcella Alsan and Marianne Wanamaker April 2016 PRELIMINARY. COMMENTS WELCOME. Abstract JEL Codes: I25, O15 For forty years, the Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male passively monitored hundreds of adult black males with syphilis despite the availability of effective treatment. The study’s methods have become synonymous with exploitation and mistreatment by the medical community. We find that the historical disclosure of the study in 1972 is correlated with in- creases in medical mistrust and mortality and decreases in outpatient physician interactions for black men. Blacks possessing prior experience with the medical community, including veterans and women, appear to have been less affected by the disclosure. Our findings relate to a broader literature on how be- liefs are formed and the importance of trust for economic exchanges involving asymmetric information. We are grateful to William Collins, Joe Ferrie, Nathan Nunn, John Parman, Achyuta Adhvaryu, Arun Chandrasekhar, Martha Bailey, Rebecca Diamond, Claudia Goldin, Melanie Morten, Mark Duggan, Mark Cullen, Melissa Dell, Nancy Qian, Ran Abramitzky, Pascaline Dupas, Rema Hanna, Grant Miller and participants at NBER DAE, University of Tennessee, Vander- bilt Health Policy, Carnegie Mellon Applied Microeconomics, University of Copenhagen Economics, University of Pennsylvania Health Policy, ASSA 2016 Berkeley Population Center, University of Chicago Harris and Stanford Health Policy for constructive comments. We thank the CDC for providing access and to the administrators at the Atlanta and Stanford Census Research Data Centers for their help in navigating the restricted data. We thank Michael Sinkinson, Martha Bailey, Andrew Goodman-Bacon and Walker Hanlon for sharing data and methods.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
    Case: 13-36217, 03/14/2016, ID: 9899915, DktEntry: 34-1, Page 1 of 33 FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT GEORGE O. MITCHELL, No. 13-36217 Plaintiff-Appellant, DC No. v. 3:12 cv-05403 BHS STATE OF WASHINGTON; KELLY CUNNINGHAM, SCC Superintendent; DR. THOMAS BELL, OPINION Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Benjamin H. Settle, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted April 6, 2015—Pasadena, California Filed March 14, 2016 Before: Dorothy W. Nelson, A. Wallace Tashima, and Richard R. Clifton, Circuit Judges. Opinion by Judge Tashima; Concurrence by Judge Clifton Case: 13-36217, 03/14/2016, ID: 9899915, DktEntry: 34-1, Page 2 of 33 2 MITCHELL V. STATE OF WASHINGTON SUMMARY* Prisoner Civil Rights The panel affirmed the district court’s summary judgment in an action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in which plaintiff, who is civilly committed as a sexually violent predator, alleged that defendants’ refusal to treat his Hepatitis C with interferon and ribavirin violated his right to reasonable medical care and that the consideration of race in the denial of this treatment violated the Equal Protection Clause. The panel first held the district court erred by finding that the damages claims against the state defendants were barred by the Eleventh Amendment. The panel held that even though plaintiff testified in his deposition that he was suing defendants only in their official capacities, his amended complaint clearly stated that he was suing defendants in both their official and personal capacities for damages and injunctive relief and the record demonstrated that plaintiff, acting pro se, did not understand the legal significance of bringing claims against defendants in their official versus personal capacities.
    [Show full text]
  • Tuskegee Mixer Materials
    Tuskegee Syphilis Study Mixer By Gretchen Kraig-Turner (with additions and revisions by Linda Christensen) Questions: 1. Find someone who supported the study. Who is it? Why did this person support the study? 2. Find someone who was hurt by the Tuskegee Study. Who is it? How was this person hurt? 3. Find someone who took action about the Tuskegee Study. Who is it? What did the person do? 4. Find someone who benefited from the Tuskegee Study. Who is it? How did this person benefit? 5. Find a doctor who was connected to the Tuskegee Study. Who is it? What was his connection to the study? 6. Find someone who was troubled by the Tuskegee Study. Who is it? What troubled this person? 7. Find someone who had to make a choice about their role in the study. Who was it? What choice did the person have to make? Jean Heller: After receiving a tip from whistleblower Peter Buxtun, who worked as an interviewer for the Public Health Service, Associated Press asked me to investigate Buxtun’s claims about an unethical medical study focused on African American men with syphilis. Although I wrote the story that eventually stopped the study, Peter Buxtun was the one who uncovered the story and investigated what he believed was an immoral study. On July 25, 1972, the Washington Evening Star newspaper ran my article on its front page: "Syphilis Patients Died Untreated." I wrote: For 40 years, the U.S. Public Health Service has conducted a study in which human guinea pigs, not given proper treatment, have died of syphilis and its side effects.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Read the Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks Our Common Read
    Common Read The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks Our common read book has inter-disciplinary value/relevance, covering social and biological sciences as well as humanities and education including scientific/medical ethics, nursing, biology, genetics, psychology, sociology, communication, business, criminal justice, history, deaf studies and social justice. Below are chapter summaries that focus on the above disciplines to give respective faculty ideas about how the book can be used for their courses. Part One: Life 1. The Exam….1951: A medical visit at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, the “northern most Southern city.” Although Johns Hopkins is established as an indigent hospital, Jim Crow era policies/ideologies are pervasive in the care/treatment of black patients. 2. Clover…1920-1942: Birthplace of Henrietta and several of the Lacks family members, including Day, Henrietta’s cousin, husband, and father of her children. A “day in the life” snapshot of life and work in this rural agricultural small town with distinct social/economic divisions across race and socioeconomic status. 3. Diagnosis and Treatment…1951: Henrietta’s diagnosis of cervical carcinomas with a history/statistical profile of diagnostic techniques and prevailing treatment regime of the time. Henrietta’s statement of consent to operative procedures is given along with removal of cancerous tissue and subsequent radium insertion into her cervix. 4. The Birth of HeLa…1951: In depth discussion of the Johns Hopkins lab including the development of an appropriate medium to grow cells. HeLa cells, the first immortal line, are born in this meticulously sterilized lab by the Geys. 5. “Blackness Be Spreadin All Inside”…1951: A look back at the lively, fun loving youthful Henrietta compared to some of the heartache of the birth of Henrietta’s second daughter, Elsie, who was born “special” (epileptic, deaf, and unable to speak).
    [Show full text]
  • Medical Ethics Christopher Newport University, Spring 2020
    Medical Ethics Christopher Newport University, Spring 2020 Meeting Info Dr. Chris Tweedt Philosophy 384, Sec. 1 202 McMurran Hall TR 7:30{8:45 pm [email protected] 357 McMurran Hall Office Hours Tuesday & Thursday 2{4 pm Textbook Bioethics: Principles, Issues, and Cases, 3rd ed. by Lewis Vaughn. Outcomes The purpose of this class is to help you 1. clearly and informedly think through ethical decisions, 2. gain an understanding of the arguments and viewpoints relevant to central medical ethics debates 3. learn to discuss polarizing issues in a charitable and respectful manner, especially in the presence of strong disagreement, and 4. develop the ability to charitably and accurately interpret, summarize, and critique philosophical arguments in the context of medical ethics. Overview Medical decisions have consequences|health-related consequences, financial conse- quences, legal consequences, and, most relevant to this course, ethical consequences. When you enter the medical field, you will be faced with difficult ethical decisions. In this course, you will learn how to make these decisions and make them well. The topics of this course are focused on issues that arise in health care professionals real- world practice. This course will present a variety of views on each topic in order to help students understand and articulate their reasons for their positions. The course is divided into three sections. 1. First, we will develop a framework for making ethical decisions. We will address these questions: Why do we treat people, and when do we know when to stop? Which principles should guide our interaction with patients and provision of treat- ment? How should we make decisions when our moral principles conflict? How do we make decisions that we know have a bad effect? How should we deal with mistakes weve made? 2.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Ethics
    History of Ethics Prior to 1906, when the Pure Food and Drug Act was passed, there were no regulations regarding the ethical use of human participants in research. There were no consumer regulations, no Food and Drug Administration (FDA), no Common Rule, and no Institutional Review Boards (IRBs). What follows is a brief discussion of why federal rules and regulations were established and why IRBs became a necessity. Nuremberg Code: The most dramatic and well-known chapter in the history of research with human participants opened on December 9, 1946, when an American military tribunal opened criminal proceedings against 23 leading German physicians and administrators for their willing participation in war crimes and crimes against humanity. Among the charges were that German Physicians conducted medical experiments on thousands of concentration camp prisoners without their consent. Most of the participants of these experiments died or were permanently crippled as a result. As a direct result of the trial, the Nuremberg Code was established in 1948, stating that "The voluntary consent of the human participant is absolutely essential," making it clear that participants should give consent and that the benefits of research must outweigh the risks. Although it did not carry the force of law, the Nuremberg Code was the first international document which advocated voluntary participation and informed consent. Thalidomide: In the late 1950s, thalidomide was approved as a sedative in Europe; it was not approved in the United States by the FDA. The drug was prescribed to control sleep and nausea throughout pregnancy, but it was soon found that taking this drug during pregnancy caused severe deformities in the fetus.
    [Show full text]
  • The Tuskegee Syphilis Study: Medical Research Versus Human Rights
    Lindsay E. Blake Information Services Coordinator Greenblatt Library Medical College of Georgia 1459 Laney-Walker Blvd. Augusta, GA 30912 706.721.3443 706.721.7625 [email protected] Abstract The Tuskegee Syphilis Study of the Untreated Male Negro has become a landmark in medical history. Since the existence of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study became public knowledge in the 1970s it has been widely regarded as one of the most blatant examples of medical racism. Knowledge of the experiments is widespread throughout minority. The study has been blamed for low African American participation in medical research by creating distrust of the medical community. Because the study was funded by the Public Health Service (PHS) it has also created a climate of distrust of the government by poor and minority populations across the United States. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study: Medical Research versus Human Rights “The Tuskegee Syphilis Study has come to symbolize the medical misconduct and blatant disregard for human rights that took place in the name of science.” The Tuskegee Syphilis Study of the Untreated Male Negro has become a landmark in medical research history. Since the existence of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study became public knowledge in the 1970s it has been widely regarded as one of the most blatant examples of medical racism. Knowledge of the experiments is widespread throughout minority populations. Many minorities believe rumors that researchers infected the study participants in order to study them. The study has been blamed for low African-American participation in medical research by creating distrust of the medical community. Because the study was funded by the Public Health Service (PHS) it has also created a climate of distrust of the government by poor and minority populations across the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ethics of Social Research
    03-HesseBiber-4725.qxd 5/25/2005 7:53 PM Page 83 CHAPTER 3 THE ETHICS OF SOCIAL RESEARCH THE TUSKEGEE SYPHILIS STUDY The Tuskegee Syphilis Study was conducted by the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) beginning in 1932. The study examined untreated cases of latent syphilis in human subjects to determine the “natural course” of the disease. Three hundred and ninety nine black males from Tuskegee, Alabama, who already had late-stage syphilis, were recruited for this study along with a matched sample of 201 noninfected males. The subjects were not asked to provide their informed consent in order to participate in this project. Those infected with syphilis in the early 1930s were given the stan- dard treatment at that time, which consisted of administering heavy metals. However, those men participating in the study were, not treated. In fact, the doctor in charge of the study noted “everyone is agreed that the proper pro- cedure is the continuance of the observation of the negro men used in the study with the idea of eventually bringing them to autopsy” (Jones, 1993, p. 132). However, when antibiotics became available in the 1940s and it was evident that this treatment would improve a patient’s chances for recovery, antibiotic treatment was withheld from the infected subjects, even though the researchers knew that if left untreated the disease would definitely progress to increased disability and eventually early death. According to some reports, “on several occasions, the USPHS actually sought to pre- vent treatment” (Heintzelman, 1996, p. 49). The experiment lasted over four decades, and it was not until 1972, in large part prompted by exposure from 83 03-HesseBiber-4725.qxd 5/25/2005 7:53 PM Page 84 84–●–THE QUALITATIVE PARADIGM the national media, that government officials finally ended the experiment.
    [Show full text]
  • COALITION for RACIAL EQUITY and SOCIAL JUSTICE Visit Us At
    COALITION FOR RACIAL EQUITY AND SOCIAL JUSTICE Visit us at http//coalition4justice.com DONATE • America’s Long-standing Inequities in Health and Health Care Exposed ❖HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE EQUITY DEFINED: o The American Public Health Association – defines “Health Equity” as everyone having the opportunity to attain their highest level of WHAT IS health. o The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) – states that HEALTH AND health equity is achieved when every person has the opportunity to “attain his or her full health potential“ and no one is “disadvantaged from achieving this potential because of social position or other HEALTH socially determined circumstances.” o Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWF) says “Health equity means CARE that everyone has a fair and just opportunity to be healthier. This requires removing obstacles to health such as poverty, discrimination, and their consequences, including powerlessness and EQUITY? lack of access to good jobs, quality education and housing, safe environments and health care.” o (Institute of Medicine (IOM) – “Providing care to everyone that does not vary in quality because of personal characteristics such as Gender, Ethnicity, Geography, and Socioeconomic status.” • Everyone having opportunity to attain What is ➢Quality health Common ➢Full health Among the ➢Highest level of health • No one is disadvantaged because of – Definitions? ➢Discrimination ➢ Poverty ➢ Powerlessness ➢Personal Characteristics HEALTH AND • Giving Every Person the Quality of Health Care HEALTH • They need, and
    [Show full text]
  • Unraveling the Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis
    COMMENTARY Unraveling the Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis ODAY WE repeatedly and public health in relation to and/ that contributed to the genesis of the hear about the or concurrent with the TSUS. This in- TSUS will be briefly described. Tuskegee Study of cludesactivitiesbythegovernmentand In the early 1930s, the Rosen- Untreated Syphilis nongovernment entities. If Americans wald Memorial Fund, a Chicago- (TSUS) in the media. do not understand the historical con- based philanthropic foundation, TThe TSUS was the 1932 through text and the successes and failures of undertook what had not been per- 1972 US Public Health Service past public health policy and medical formed before in America—a study (USPHS) study involving approxi- practices,wemayrepeatsimilarerrors. of the prevalence of syphilis among mately 400 African American men A historically correct, empiri- African Americans. The study was with syphilis who were found un- cally based analysis of the TSUS is performed with the cooperation of treated in rural Alabama and were ob- presented in this article. This is im- the USPHS. The purpose of the study served to autopsy. As a control, there portant given the impact that pre- was to determine the practicability was also a comparable group of 200 vious interpretations (ie, racism, and effectiveness of measures for African American men without syphi- genocide, and conspiracy) of the mass control of syphilis. Macon lis who were observed to autopsy.1 TSUS have had on present-day re- County, Alabama, was one of 6 ru- The TSUS is a topic the domain search, medical practice, and race re- ral counties chosen for study; the of which includes not only medicine lations.
    [Show full text]