Questions

How should the principle of informed consent be interpreted when the subject of a research project is newborn infants?

~The parent is in charge of the infant so they must give the consent to the doctor and scientist.

What possible outcomes would justify a research project that will have the inevitable outcome of stigmatizing the subjects in a way that may result in serious restrictions on their personal freedom?

~Possibly if the outcomes of the research project varied every time, such as, being negative or positive, the subjects would not be stigmatized.

Is it possible to design an ethical, valid research project aimed at establishing a genetic component for the predisposition to some socially unacceptable behavior?

~I think it is possible, but am not a scientist so cannot think of a project??

Under what circumstances is it ethical to deny human subjects of research projects information about the results of that research?

~Only when the results may inhibit the way people perceive the child.

To what extent should the public be represented on institutional review boards set up to approve research that may have serious social or political consequences?

~I think that the public should be fully informed on the research if it has social or political consequences because if the consequences are serious enough, it could really affect the public.

What are the ethical implications of using genetic screening in the workplace to exclude candidates from eligibility for jobs? Is it ethically permissible to use genetic susceptibility to various diseases as a basis for determining eligibility for health care coverage?

~ I don't think its right to exclude an applicant because they have a gene that can be linked to a disease.

XYY controversy

                In the 1960s, scientists found some males with an extra Y chromosome in their genes.   A research study found that these special males are prone to be violent.  There was an article published in 1961 that told the public that scientists had found the first XYY male.  In 1968 when a XYY male would find himself in trouble and had to stand before the court, his lawyer blamed his actions on his condition. Stanley Walzer and Park Gerald screened all newborn males for the XYY chromosome. This enraged some groups such as Science for the People, that was lead by Jonathon Beckwith and Jonathon King. In 1974, they claimed the research seriously stigmatized infants that actually have an XYY chromosome. Walzer and Gerald were forced to end their research, due to informed consent reasons and no useful purpose or scientific conclusions for the research.