Year 10 Science · Unit 1 · Lesson 22
Challenge Worksheet
Learning Goals
Judge two responses
Each response below reaches a conclusion badly. For each, name the specific reasoning flaw. "It is biased" is not an answer.
| Response | The reasoning flaw |
|---|---|
| "They should stop using HeLa immediately. Taking the cells was wrong, and nothing good can come from something that started that way." | |
| "HeLa helped create the polio vaccine and appears in over a hundred thousand papers. That proves taking the cells was the right decision." | |
| "The family got a settlement in 2023, so the ethical questions are now closed." |
Build the argument
Answer this question in CER form: should companies selling HeLa cells commercially be required to share revenue with the Lacks family?
| Claim | |
| Evidence 1 (with date) | |
| Evidence 2 (with date) | |
| Reasoning (name the principle) | |
| Strongest counterargument |
1. The Nuremberg Code required voluntary consent from 1947, four years before the HeLa sample was taken, yet no United States law then required consent for tissue kept after treatment. Use this to explain the difference between a legal standard and an ethical standard.
2. In 2013 the HeLa genome was published without consulting the family, and was withdrawn after they objected. Explain why publishing the genome of a person who died in 1951 raised a consent problem about living people, and what the resulting NIH arrangement changed.
3. If a sample were taken from you in an Australian hospital tomorrow, describe two protections that would apply which did not apply in 1951 Baltimore, and explain what each is designed to prevent.
4. Evaluate this statement: "Because the harm to Henrietta Lacks cannot be undone, the only ethical question left about HeLa is what happens to the money." Do you agree? Justify your position with reference to at least two ethical principles.
Wrap Up
What is one condition you would attach to the continued use of HeLa, and which principle does it serve?