The biography written by Rebecca Skloot seeks to illustrate the life behind the cells that has given millions of others the health that Henrietta did not have. During the times in which Henrietta was diagnosed with cervical cancer, race and segregation problems were very predominant within society. Being a woman of color, Henrietta was disadvantaged when it came to medical care because of the unequal system that was set up. In addition, Henrietta came from a low class family of tobacco farmers and had financial adversities that made her even more prone to being taken advantage of. Henrietta died from her disease in 1951 and much of the reason why her cells were taken without consent was likely due to the racial inequality. At the time, there were no laws requiring that doctors inform patients if they were to take tissue samples, nevertheless, it was still a courtesy to do so. The same privileges reserved for white patients were not guaranteed to Henrietta and the doctors neglected to honor her as a patient. Although the doctors did seek permission to acquire tissue samples from Henrietta after her …show more content…
Patients are now allowed to withhold consent for their samples to be taken, however, that does not mean their wishes are honored. Surprisingly, almost every patient that has ever gotten any form of testing done in a medical facility has their blood and tissues stored away somewhere. This is an appalling discovery because it could very well unfold into another story that will be much similar to Henrietta’s. If I were to fall into a situation like Henrietta’s and my cells ended up being beneficial to science, I would feel entitled to some form of compensation. Doctors are replicating my cells and selling it for profit, therefore, it would seem only right to pay me a portion of that amount. Problems with ethics and research have long been disputed because of the many consequences that the research could yield. For instance, the medical research in Henrietta's case has helped millions of people through the development of vaccinations and cures, however, there is an ethical dilemma. Obtaining samples from living patients without consent is unethical, yet, there is more debate when the patient is no longer alive. Perhaps the only way to alleviate problems that are similar to Henrietta’s case would be to make up for the lack of consent through compensation from the HeLa cells’ profits. Ultimately, the