Medical Experiments

Ethical Dilemma: case study of clinical trial on a child The field of medicine and research has been surrounded by issue of experiments in order to have the conclusive result of the effectiveness of a drug or otherwise. These results can only be obtained if the drugs are at times used on human beings with the real medical problem that the experiment seeks to find solution to.

The problem of ethical dilemma often comes in at such stages on whether to go ahead to experiment on the effectiveness of the new drug or not. Ethical dilemma refers to the situation that is deemed complex since it involves some element of mental conflict between moral imperatives that is one goes ahead and obeys one, it will mean the transgression of another (Braunack-Meyer A.J., 2001).

The individual does not have a clear cut direction on which option to go for, despite there being a need for an action to be taken and the experiment to be carried out since the disease prevails at that particular moment that the experiment is to be carried out and the consequences of the disease are evident. In the case of the child with cancer and the dissent to getting the experimental treatment that has just been discovered presents a complex situation that raises the issue of ethical dilemma.

The parent of the child, knowing that the child has cancer and may die of it, opts for the experimental treatment with hopes that it words for the child, but the child, also aware of his suffering from cancer and the possibility of the new treatment method working, declines to participate in the medical experiment. The law and the informed consent requirement remains in place and this is one of the central bioethics that the law seeks to protect at all costs.

It is required that the child has to give a willing and conscious consent of participation in any medical experimentation (Spriggs M., 2010:Pp5). The consent of the child is not negotiable as long as they are conscious and this was the case that was presented in this particular case study where the parent was being used to influence the child to change his stand on the experiment and accept to participate in it instead of resisting the experimental treatment in totality.

Generally, the medical experiments are assisted by willing participants when some facts are put straight and the participant is assured of. One of the conditions is that when the experiment to be conducted is deemed to create or bring more good or advantages to the willing participant and at the same time exposing the participant to relatively minor risks in the process (Pier B.K., 2007).

The dilemma that this brings about, in line with the case study under scrutiny here is that, determining who is in the best position to know the level of good that the experiment will bring forth is very treacherous, is it the parent or the child who understands best the experiment as explained by the doctors? In this case, it is true that the child may not have a better understanding of the explanations for the medical experiment, but it remains that it is his body that will be used and he has to fin it beneficial to him, and that is what would suffice, hence leaving the doctor and the parent in dilemma.

The other assertion in the medical experiments is that it needs to show that the experiment will generate great societal benefits, predispose the participants to minimum risks in the process. In the case study here, it is not clear how the great societal benefits are gauged and the child may argue that his consent or lack of it is part of this societal good where no one is forced to risk their lives without being sure of the experiment.

Apparently the choice of the child needs to be respected and taken into consideration first. The attempt of the parents to prevail over the child to change his mind and participate in the experiment anyhow wills the unethical. This is informed by the fact that the child chose to decline participation after a clear explanation by the experimenting doctors on the procedure and the expected results.

Any further prodding by the parents to participate in the experiment anyway since the parents have accepted the participation can be construed as coercion into participation. It can be taken that the parents are using the undue influence that they have other the child as the parents.