Introduction
Human experiments of the past century are still shocking for the modern world. Still, they are considered elements of history that cannot be erased due to physical and emotional trauma imposed on people. Examples of such projects are Nazi Germany experiments, the Tuskegee study, the Soviet chamber, and the Aversion Project (Giancola, 2020). The latter was an experiment conducted on thousands of South African homosexual soldiers to convert them to heterosexuality (Giancola, 2020). This project was started by the military psychiatrist Aubrey Levin in the 1970s (“Aubrey Levin,” 2019). He claimed that using electric shock therapy while exposing gays and lesbians to pornographic images in a homosexual context can eradicate same-sex attraction in these individuals (“Aubrey Levin,” 2019). While working in the South African Defense Force (SADF), Levin tested his methodology in a military hospital in Pretoria, where a special unit known as Ward 22 was dedicated to this project (“Aubrey Levin,” 2019). Still, this experiment was a clear violation of human rights because it not only supported homophobic ideas but also forced people, who have a fundamental right of freedom of choice, to receive potentially harmful therapy.
Description of Issue, Background, and Historical Perspective
Ward 22 and Levin seem to become the symbols of homophobia in South Africa. Even the works of authors from this region could openly discuss the issues of homosexuality until 1994 (Zabus, 2021). In fact, being gay, lesbian, and transgender was illegal during the South African apartheid; thus, the Aversion Project was not exposed to any governmental inspection and public criticism in the 1970s (McCormick, 2018). Notably, although homosexuality was legally banned, SADF seemed to accept gays and lesbians in the army, but it was done not to give young people a reason to escape their duty to serve (McCormick, 2018). However, many of them were tortured, forced to undergo chemical castration, and lived in severe conditions to treat their sexual predilections (McCormick, 2018). This project and other pseudoscientific studies of the twentieth century were driven by the ideas of eugenics, which is a form of scientific racism (Camminga, 2019). Fortunately, these experiments were banned by the government in the post-apartheid era, creating regulations that legally protected homosexuals and expressing an apology to those who were exposed to the Aversion therapy.
Demographics of the Affected Individuals
People who were affected by the Aversion Project were primarily LGBTQ people living in South Africa. Specifically, SADF targeted white gay and lesbian individuals to eradicate their so-called nonconformist eroticism with electric shock therapy (“Aubrey Levin,” 2019; McCormick, 2018). Moreover, Levin applied his treatment method not only to homosexual individuals but also to illicit drug users and even conscientious objectors (“Aubrey Levin,” 2019). Many of these people who were considered not to be successfully converted to heterosexuality were sent to camps with harsh living conditions, where they were expected to be finally cured through manual labor, lack of social interaction, and other hardships.
Ethical Principle Violated
The main ethical principle violated in the Aversion Project was the human right to freedom of choice. Although the World Health Association developed ethical principles of medical research in 1964, highlighting the importance of informed consent, privacy, and safety, SADF’s doctors still did not follow this declaration’s postulates (Macha & McDonough, 2011). Additionally, this experiment was an apparent breach of fundamental ethical principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice (Haswell, 2019). Firstly, in medical practice, beneficence is making decisions in the patient’s best interests (Haswell, 2019). This principle was violated since many homosexuals were forced to undergo treatment without scientific evidence of being safe, effective, and, most importantly, necessary. Secondly, non-maleficence means avoiding causing any physical or psychological harm to individuals (Haswell, 2019). In this project, patients were physically and emotionally abused, leaving painful, traumatic memories. Thirdly, autonomy is the right to make informed and willful decisions about treatment (Haswell, 2019). Not only the project’s participants were not appropriately informed about Aversion therapy; they were forced to undergo this treatment. Lastly, justice means respecting people’s rights and freedoms, but this principle was neglected even legislatively during the apartheid era.
Essential Information to Provide
When people undergo specific medical diagnostic or curative procedures or receive any other therapy, healthcare providers must inform them about the purpose of treatment, its expected outcomes, potential adverse effects of accepting or denying it. This information allows patients to make conscious decisions about consenting or refusing the offered method (Haswell, 2019). Similarly, in the Aversion Project, Levin and his colleagues should have provided detailed information and asked the participants if they accepted the proposed therapy. However, during the era of intense scientific experiments on the human body driven by the twentieth century’s false beliefs about racial superiority and inferiority as well as homophobia, informed consent was never provided.
Role of Informed Consent
Informed consent, as the name suggests, is needed to explain to an individual a proposed diagnostic or treatment method so that one can decide whether to accept or refuse it. In the Aversion Project, even if being gay and lesbian was considered to be a psychiatric disorder at that time in South Africa, doctors involved in the study had a moral obligation to inform patients and allow them to make an uncoerced decision. In fact, homosexuality was established as a psychiatric disorder in 1973, and doctors might believe that these people did not have the mental capacity to choose their treatment (Camminga, 2019). Fortunately, that classification was later proven false and removed from the diagnostic manual. Still, even with old diagnostic criteria, the participants’ families had the right to read the informed consent and consider whether their loved ones required that therapy without any scientific base.
Impact on Person
Levin’s proposed treatment method for converting homosexuals to heterosexuals had a severe impact on the participants’ well-being. It is estimated that SADF conducted about 900 sex-changing procedures from 1970 to 1990 (Camminga, 2019). Being exposed to electric shock therapy or chemical castration caused immense physical and emotional pain to those individuals who were forced to participate in the Aversion Project (McCormick, 2018). LGBTQ people could not only freely express their sexual preferences but were also scrutinized, strictly monitored, and medically tortured. Overall, such unbearable pressure from the government, society, and local leaders, namely military directors, caused immense pain and suffering to the participants of this project.
Public Trust
The Aversion Project was not widely discussed in South Africa during apartheid, but it caused public distrust among the population. Although the separatist groups supported homophobic legislation, the general public, especially authors and non-profit organizations, supported gays’ and lesbians’ rights in their works, meetings, and demonstrations (McCormick, 2018). In fact, when apartheid ended, the government developed policies in support of homosexuals and those who were affected by SADF experiments; hence, public trust seemed to be reinstalled.
Confidentiality and Safety
Although homosexuality is no longer included in psychiatric manuals, it was and still is a sensitive topic that demands confidentiality, which was supposed to be raised in any scientific project, let alone the Aversion Project. The latter jeopardized the participants’ safety by using questionable and potentially dangerous treatment methods. Still, confidentiality was not the primary problem in the case of the Aversion Project since SADF conducted the experiment in military hospitals. The main issue was that most, if not all, participants did not consent to Levin’s therapy (“Aubrey Levin,” 2019). Furthermore, their physical and psychological health was threatened because electric shock therapy, chemical castration, and forced labor had adverse effects that did not outweigh the alleged benefits.
Conclusion
In summary, the Aversion Project was one of the dark points of South African history. It was conducted in military psychiatric hospitals during the apartheid period. The methodology of treating gays and lesbians using electric shock therapy was proposed by Aubrey Levin, an army physician with power and influence in the South African Defense Force. During two decades, hundreds of young white homosexuals were forced to enter this project to be cured of their nonconformist sexual preferences. Although the government of the country expressed its apology to the victims of the Aversion Project soon after apartheid ended, this treatment method caused significant emotional and physical suffering to the affected individuals. Overall, the SADF’s project, which was similar to many pseudoscientific human studies based on eugenics, showed that the lack of control and regulation might lead to immoral and dangerous experiments. Therefore, it is vital to follow the core ethical principles, including autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice, to avoid harm and maximize the benefit of scientific research to humanity.
References
Aubrey Levin. (2019, August 23). South African History Online. Web.
Camminga, B. (2019). The emergence of a discourse of transgender in South Africa. In Transgender Refugees and the Imagined South Africa (pp. 39–84). Palgrave Macmillan.
Giancola, S. P. (2020). History of evaluation. In Program evaluation: Embedding evaluation into program design and development (pp. 31-50). Sage Publications.
Haswell, N. (2019). The four ethical principles and their application in aesthetic practice. Journal of Aesthetic Nursing, 8(4), 177–179. Web.
Macha, K., & McDonough, J. (2011). Ethical and legal issues in epidemiology. In Epidemiology for advanced nursing practice (pp. 323-340). Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
McCormick, T. L. (2018). Dragging up the past: Investigating historical representations of drag in South Africa. Gender & Language, 12(2), 168–191.
Zabus, C. (2021). Outing Africa: On sexualities, gender, and transgender in African literatures. In O. George (Ed.), A companion to African literatures (1st ed., pp. 381–398). John Willey & Sons Ltd.