A Child's Tissue

I feel that if a child's tissue was taken instead of an adult's, it wouldn't be a completely different argument. I feel that it would be the same argument but more intense because a child is not able of making autonomous decisions by themselves. In other words, taking tissue from a child unknowingly not only goes behind the child's back but it also goes behind the parents' backs because they are in charge of the child. Furthermore, "because children have not yet developed their capacities, it seems wrong to subject them to risks that might alter the course of their lives for the worse" (pg. 156). If the news came out about the tissue being taken from a child, I feel that there would have been a large backlash against the medical community.
Children are seen as being more innocent compared to adult so the removal of their tissue is also seen as more controversial. For example, the Willowbrook Study became extremely popular due to the controversial idea of giving children Hepatitis on purpose. Overall, I don't believe that having tissue taken from a child would be a different argument since it is the same idea of having tissue taken unknowingly. However, the case would become more severe since research involving children is one of the most controversial areas of study (pg. 156).
Word Count: 228