2. 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?

If the person would die otherwise or if it would save many people's lives, this could be justified.

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

We feel it is not ethical because it is your rigtht to know the results. 

5. 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?

People who have more knowledge adn experience should have mre say than those who have less knowledge or experience.

6. 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?

Your genes should not have anything to do with your job eligibility unless it would cause harm to those involved in the job or yourself. No, it is not ethical and it does not need to used to get health care coverage. 

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

If you get the patient's consent and they know the effects and anything that could go wrong, it is ethical. You would also have to included all the research done, and any possible side-effects.

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

You could view this the same as if an adult were to have research done on them. But because it is a infant you must look deeper than the normal pros and cons. The baby could intercept diseases that might not affect normal adult patients. Babies' immune systems are much weaker than those of adults.

Case Summary

XYY Controversy Case Summary

There has been hard work to inform the people of genetic development that have been done on people without their consent that has caused many controversies. The practice of genetic development was used by the Nazis that were trying to create a superior race. Information gotten from the Human Genome Project is going to bring into the light both a lot of different concerns of trying to screen, control, manipulate, or manipulate people’s genetic dispositions, things in genes more likely to get a disease, behavioral issue, or something else. The XYY controversy is a case that shows many ethical issues that come up when exploring differences in genes.

In 1961, the first man with an extra Y chromosome was discovered. Normal men only have one X and one Y chromosomes. The extra Y chromosome was referred as the “criminal chromosome”. They are referred as this because men with an extra Y chromosome were believed to be more violent. This belief turned out to be a myth but was widely believed and eventually was printed in biology books.

A study by child psychiatrist Stanley Walzer and Harvard Medical School geneticist Park Gerald to screen all new born males. They were screening for abnormal karyotypes such as XYY or XXY. Harvard microbiology professor Jonathan Beckwith and MIT molecular biology professor, Jonathan King said that the research done by Walzer and Gerald did not produce valid and scientific conclusions. King and Beckwith led criticism against the study. The Science for the People Group tried to get Walter and Gerald’s research stopped by appealing to the institutional review board, but they failed. The Science for the People Group tried to get the screening stopped again by getting help from organizations who were concerned with children’s welfare. This tactic finally achieved the goal of getting Walzer and Gerald, along with other researchers, to stop screening newborns for XYY. The victory was finally won but with that win, some biomedical researchers became alienated or separated from everyone else.

Hey everybody this blog is for the XYY Controversy!