Tuskegee Syphilis Study

Introduction In a society where racism has always been a pervasive issue, the need for resocialization of the members of the society with the aim of promoting cultural relativism and respect for all humanity regardless of race cannot be underestimated. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study was certainly more than an issue of unethical scientific studies. It was an act of racial discrimination targeting a minority group and was influenced by the prejudiced view of the minority group as sexually irresponsible. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study began in 1932. It involved the US Public Health Service and the Tuskegee Institute and was aimed at finding out the natural course of untreated syphilis with the aim of justifying treatment programs for the blacks (Brandt, 2015). Even when penicillin was proven to be successful in the treatment of syphilis in 1947, the subjects were not treated.

The study went on until 1972 under the supervision of the US Public Health Service in spite of attempts by several whistleblowers to speak out on the unethical nature of the study. In 1972, Peter Buxtun got the story to the media and this attracted the attention of the government, and the study was brought to a halt. Laws and regulations were also put into place by the US government to protect participants of clinical studies. Researchers were from then required to accurately report of test results, seek informed consent from participants and communicate with them on their diagnosis. In the study, an example of prejudice is the belief that blacks are small-minded, lust-driven, genetically inferior and syphilitic. Through prejudicial norms and beliefs, members of the dominant groups are convinced that members of a given minority group are inferior or less deserving.

As such, they feel justified to treat them as such, and that’s how discrimination comes into play. The dominant group at the time of the study was the white doctors and researchers working with the US Public Health Service. They thought that they were superior to the non-dominant African Americans in education, economic status, prestige, and power. Peers as agents of socialization were responsible for the shaping of the opinion of the whites that the African Americans were sexually immoral and therefore susceptible to venereal diseases and hence the decision by the white doctors and researchers working for the government to have the African American males as the subject for the Syphilis studies. According to Brandt (2015): “the medical profession supported these findings of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century anthropologists, ethnologists, and biologists” (67).

This is proof that the prejudiced beliefs that the white doctors held about blacks were shaped by their peers in other areas of research such as anthropology, ethnology, and biology who also had the same beliefs on the black community. Mass media as an agent of socialization played the role of bringing to the attention of the public and the government the unethical study and consequently influenced the government to investigate the study, have it stopped and put laws and regulations to regulate scientific studies in place by bringing to attention the unethical nature of the study. As Brandt (2015) explains in his article: “HEW finally formed the Tuskegee Syphilis Study Ad Hoc Advisory Panel on August 28, 1972, in response to criticism that the press descriptions of the experiment had triggered” (74).

In the study, ethnocentrism is seen in the prejudicial beliefs that blacks are small-minded, lust-driven, genetically inferior and syphilitic. Another of the ways through which members of the society can promote social change is through resocialization which, according to Ferris and Stein, is “the process of replacing previously learned norms and values with new ones as a part of the transition in life” (111). If members of the society replaced their previous beliefs on some social groups being inferior to others in the society with the understanding that we are all equal regardless of our differences, social change would be effected. I can promote social change in my community by first of all being a good role model by portraying positive social change.

Another of the ways through which this can be achieved is by participating in forums, projects, and activities that aim at promoting social change by nurturing a culture of healthy social interaction with the goal of bettering the society. The white doctors and researchers used their power, prestige and control to control the African American men by deceiving them into taking part in the unethical study by withholding some details of the study such as the diagnosis of the subjects, that they were not actually being treated for syphilis and that they were part of an experiment that would take longer than the 6 months they stated and telling them that they were getting treated for “bad blood”. In this case, the African American minority group was exploited and consequently exposed to risks by the dominant group for purposes of their research.

Ferris and Stein (2016) define social inequality as the unequal distribution of power, prestige or wealth among the members of society. In the study, it is seen in the denying of the black subjects of the study access to syphilis cure. The study sparked a lot of conversation on racism and contributed to the further division of the already racially divided society. Who initiated and created the study? The U. S. Public Health Service G. What was the race of the primary researchers/scientists of the study? White H. What was the goal of the study? To determine the natural course of untreated latent syphilis in black men I. Using cultural beliefs and values of the 21st century answer the following question: Was this study ethical or unethical? The study was unethical, first because it jeopardized the wellbeing of the participants by denying them treatment for syphilis, and secondly because it targeted a specific race and was therefore somewhat racist.

M. How do you determine if the study was ethical or unethical? By considering the ethical policies governing scientific studies and also the cultural values and beliefs of the 21st century N. Would it be acceptable to replicate this study today? It would not be acceptable O. At the time that study began and ended, describe the dominant group who controlled and oversaw the study? The dominant group controlling the study was white scientists/researchers. Is there a difference between then and now? a. Why yes OR why no? The dominant group of the 21st and 20th centuries is the white community. Although the issue of racism still exists, there is a difference between then and now because the white people are now a bit more accepting of the black people, which is mostly as a result of the policies and regulations put in place by the US government to fight racism.

T. At any time during the study, was the dominant group exhibiting ethnocentrism or cultural relativism? The dominant group exhibited ethnocentrism throughout the study. Were informal norms violated during the study? a. If so, describe examples Informal norms were violated during the study. Examples of the violations include the deliberate targeting of a certain race in the study (African Americans) which is essentially racism. Another of the violations involved targeting persons from low socio-economic backgrounds as the study involved African American men from poor backgrounds. X. Z. What role does socialization play in the acceptance of beliefs about a particular group of people in U. S. society? Review info presented in Ch 4 Through socialization, one’s patterns of thinking, feeling and acting as pertains to a particular group of people are influenced, and this consequently determines whether or not one accepts the beliefs of the group of people in question.

AA. The society judges them more harshly than the dominant groups, even for the same issues. DD. What type of social control was used to discourage the subjects from NOT participating? The type of social control used lure participants into the study was exploitation. The subjects were told that they were ill and promised free care. They were also not told that they were participants in an experiment and they only thought that they were being treated for ‘bad blood. race/ethnicity c. wealth, prestige, and power 1. Leading by example by avoiding any forms of inequality in my dealings. Being an advocate for equality in my family, place of work, school and other places where I go to. Speaking out on acts of inequality in the society 4.