The main discussions in Brandt’s article were basically explaining how they conducted the experiment and the how the era in which It happened effected it. Social Darwinism was big at the time so the way white people saw people of color was horrific but what was worse is that some physicians accepted these beliefs so that reflected in their work. Brandt, A.M. discussed how they chose their subjects, the tests given to everyone to evaluate them to see if they were right for the tests, how the health authorities portraited these men as sexual animals and how they were really focused on their genitals, and the end results of the study. One of the positive things in my opinion was the formation of boards and legislations for the health department. It consisted of nine board members. It is beneficial to the people of the community to feel safe and protected by the people who are supposed to be taking care of them. Having this committee was a crucial first step in rebuilding trust. Although it was formed afterward it was still needed.
This case study should never be replicated nor, will it ever be acceptable to replicate. Anyone who has basic knowledge and understanding on how to treat people can tell you this case study was unethical. There are rules and regulations, as well as basic human rights to follow for every person to perform their duties in each chosen field of profession. The health providers conducting these experiments blatantly offered a treatment to these men with no real intentions of treating them. From the way they selected the subjects, to the way they got tested to be a part of the experiment, to the time length of the experiment, to how many people died and how many kids born after had syphilis,
We will send an essay sample to you in 2 Hours. If you need help faster you can always use our custom writing service.Get help with my paper