Results of the Nuremberg Trial
Human subject research is a critical issue that has piqued the interest of most organizations around the world. Because of the importance of this research, a code of ethics has been established to ensure that research protects the rights of human subjects. The Nuremberg Code mentions the values that should be followed while studying these subjects. This is well-known for its predetermined values on any human subjects research. This code was established in Germany after Nazi physicians subjected Jews to murderous medical research (Earl, 2009). American prosecutors were forced to intervene, resulting in the creation of this code, which is still in use around the world today. The code requires anyone conducting research on humans to obtain their consent, which must be voluntary rather than forced because it is critical. The code also requires all participants in the research to ensure that the research does not cause unnecessary suffering, injury, or death to human subjects. This paper aims to explain the Nuremberg Code and how it aids in the protection of human subjects rights in research.
CLICK HERE TO ORDER A CUSTOM-WRITTEN, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER
Following the hearing of the Nuremberg Trial, a case involving doctors who engaged in human experiments in concentration camps, resulting in the sterilization of over 3 million people, the judges delivered their verdict, with the outcome of the trial being ten points that later became the Nuremberg Code. The code is intended to serve as a guide for anyone conducting human-related research. The Nuremberg Code serves as ethical guidelines for any research involving human subjects. This code is how society makes sure that research ethics are followed, especially when people are used as subjects.
Nuremburg Trial Results
According to the Nuremberg Code, all human subjects must give their consent before participating in any research. The codes ensure that the people being studied give their consent voluntarily, without coercion or being forced to do so. According to Mduluza (2006), this voluntary consent is critical for all researchers, without which no human-subject research can be conducted. This human research protection ensures that all humans are aware of the research being conducted on them and, as a result, are aware of any implications that may arise as a result of the research. In some cases, research on human subjects has resulted in mental and physical suffering, necessitating the need to ensure that they give their consent for the research. To make sure that people who agree to research do so with full knowledge, many steps must be taken, including telling the subjects about the research.
Furthermore, the Nuremberg Trial established another principle of beneficence, directing research toward the people who will benefit from it. The Nuremberg Code encourages research that benefits society and the human race. Furthermore, the research should ensure that all participants benefit from the findings. It is ethical to make certain that any research conducted on human subjects benefits those subjects. All research conducted on human subjects must ensure that it is safe for them, and no other method may be used to arrive at a projected solution. This helps to avoid and reduce cases of human exploitation, which happens when some researchers study people in ways that don’t help or improve their lives in any way.
Another outcome of the Nuremberg Trial is that researchers should always be concerned about the welfare of human subjects. The Nuremberg Code requires the researcher to stop the research if the continuation of the research will cause the human subject harm or suffering. Furthermore, the researcher must be qualified to conduct the research, and the research must be terminated if the completion of the research causes suffering to human subjects. Human subjects may feel pain, die, become disabled, or get hurt during the experiment. The researcher must make sure that the health and mental state of the human subjects come before the importance of the research.
The Institutional Review Board (IRB) (IRB)
The Institutional Review Board was established to assist researchers in carrying out their research on human subjects and to protect human subjects from being exploited during research. According to Emanuel (2008), the IRB’s primary role is to ensure that any research involving human subjects is appropriate, which they accomplish through review and approval of the research. The IRB reviews all human subject research to ensure that it is ethical and protects the rights of human subjects. This board ensures that any research is ethical and thus grants permission for the researcher to conduct it. Furthermore, the Institutional Review Board has the authority to approve or disapprove any research involving human subjects, and in some cases, the board may request that the researcher make changes to the research in order to obtain approval (Stark, 2012). All of this is done to make sure that research is done in a way that is good for people and that respects their rights.
The primary goal of the Institutional Review Board is to ensure that the rights of human subjects in any given research are upheld and respected and that no research is conducted that violates the rights of those involved in the research (Emanuel, 2008). Human subjects’ rights are protected and upheld by this board, and any researcher seeking to conduct research must disclose and prove to the board that the person consented to the research. Also, the board makes sure that the researcher follows all the rules and guidelines that have been set up for research involving people.
As a researcher, I would not use live subjects in a study if human rights were not respected. To begin with, using live subjects in any study is unethical. Any research conducted on humans is usually aimed at improving people’s lives, so it may be necessary to conduct the research. However, conducting research on human subjects is risky because it may result in the suffering, harm, or even death of the human subject, and no research is aimed at causing death. This is the primary reason why conducting research involving human subjects would be difficult. Furthermore, conducting research on human subjects without their consent is unethical. This is not good and is unethical because it is an infringement on a person’s private life, which may result in both mental and physical suffering, and is thus not good at all. Because humans are autonomous agents, it is critical to allow them to decide whether or not to participate in research.
Human subject protection during research
There are a number of moral principles that govern the protection of human subjects and their rights. One of the principles is to allow human subjects to consent to any research on them. According to this principle, all human beings must be given the opportunity to decide and consent to the continuation of any type of research on them. Because all human beings are autonomous subjects, all human subjects must voluntarily agree to any research without being coerced or forced. This means that the subject may refuse to have any research done on them in some cases, and thus the researcher has no permission to continue with the research regardless of its importance or urgency.
Furthermore, the researcher is required to protect the human subject by ensuring that the experiment is not painful to the subject. This principle requires all researchers to be focused on their research and to ensure that it does not cause any mental or physical suffering. Instead, the researcher must ensure that they get the most out of the research, with the benefits outweighing the drawbacks. All researchers are responsible for making sure that the risks of their work are kept to a minimum.
Research on human subjects is critical, and all those involved in this type of research must be keen and committed to respecting human rights. This type of research requires everyone to ensure that the subjects voluntarily consent to the research and that they have the right to terminate any research on them if it causes them physical or mental harm. Human subjects’ integrity should also be protected in this type of research.
Stark, L. J. M. (2012).IRBs and the creation of ethical research behind closed doors The University of Chicago Press is located in Chicago, Illinois.
E. J. Emanuel (2008), Oxford’s clinical research ethics textbook. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Earl, H. (2009). The Nuremberg Trial of the SS-Einsatzgruppen, 1945–1958: Atrocity, Law, and History Cambridge University Press, New York, N.Y.
CLICK HERE TO ORDER A CUSTOM-WRITTEN, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER