It has become common today to view the research ethics of human subjects in the light of The Nuremberg Code (1949), which lies in the foundation of all further reports on this subject. It is important to trace the roots of these ethical regulations that go back to the Nazi executions at wartime. The first and the essential principle of the after-war ethical guidance is the voluntary consent of the human subject, as Annas (2017) underlined. One of the outrageous cases of its abuse was described by Skloot (2010) in her book The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. The surgeons in John Hopkins hospital took a sample of the African American woman’s cervical cancer tumor without her consent in 1950 and without even reporting it to Henrietta Lacks and her family. The reason for doing that lies in the Nazi heritage of considering some people not as human beings but as abstractions (Utley, 1992). Thus, racist practices of treating African Americans were not perceived as violating ethical standards as such people were not considered fully human. Nowadays, evident progress has been made in the ethics of human subjects’ research. Such documents as The Belmont Report (Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1979) and The Declaration of Helsinki (WMA, 1964) underline the importance of following these norms and highlight the special rules for biomedical research and practice.
Importance of Research Ethics
Research ethics remains one of the most controversial and most important issues throughout time. The need for these norms arose after the Nuremberg trials and led to the pronouncement of The Nuremberg Code (Weindling, 2004). Despite the official documents and reports establishing specific ethical guidelines concerning this topic, the cases provoked by the failure in understanding or by a desire to have personal gain are to be constantly observed (Marshall, 2003). That’s why it is crucial to continue the research observation and not allow human rights violations, as the basic principles highlighted in The Belmont Report (Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1979) include respect for a person, beneficence, and justice. Moreover, research ethics is closely linked to social responsibility (Žukauskas et al., 2018). An unethical approach to the research can cause actual harm, especially when used for medical purposes (Resnik, 2018). Emphasizing this importance, one must mention the establishment of the Institutional Review Board – an ethics committee that approves every research on human subjects (SLU IRB, 2019). I believe that research ethics concerns every person globally, especially those somehow involved in academic society. As a student, I want not to use any unethical materials in my works and follow the rules denoted in the abovementioned documents when doing my research.
My research concerns the impact of and reporting in line and hangar maintenance on commercial aviation accident trends. Although no connection seems to appear between this agenda and ethical research at first glance, it is still relevant. One of the essential methods of proactive hazard identification is Line Operations Safety Audit and Normal Operations Safety Survey that trace human performance (SKYbrary, n.d.). Thus, while analyzing any specific actions of people, it is necessary to obtain their voluntary consent – the foundation principle of research ethics (The Nuremberg Code, 1949). Moreover, excluding all the technical issues that could appear, the only reasons for any commercial aviation accidents remain human factors or natural disasters (Ma et al., 2015). The respect for a person must be demonstrated, according to The Belmont Report (Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1979), meaning in that case that no accusations should be made without any justified knowledge. Another factor worth mentioning is that personnel is the most common cause of aircraft incidents (National Research Council, 1998). Hence, even though my focus is on reporting in line and hangar maintenance, it is necessary to pay attention to the overall tendency. Although my research agenda hardly need the approval of the Institutional Review Board, as it does not fit the definition of human subjects research, according to SLU IRB (2019), it is still essential to consider the research ethics.
References
Annas G. J. (2018). Beyond Nazi War Crimes Experiments: The Voluntary Consent Requirement of the Nuremberg Code at 70.American journal of public health, 108(1), 42–46. Web.
Annas, G. J. (Ed.). (1992). The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code: Human Rights in Human Experimentation. Oxford University Press.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. (1979). The Belmont Report. Web.
Ma, M. J., Rankin, W. L., Drury, C. G., Allen, J. W., & Brys, J. J. (2015). Operator’s Manual for Human Factors in Aviation Maintenance. Federal Aviation Administration.
Marshall, P. L. (2003). Human Subjects Protections, Institutional Review Boards, and Cultural Anthropological Research, 76(2), 269-285. George Washington University Institute for Ethnographic Research.
National Research Council. (1998). Improving the Continued Airworthiness of Civil Aircraft: A Strategy for the FAA’s Aircraft Certification Service. National Academies Press.
Resnik, D. B. (2018). The Ethics of Research with Human Subjects: Protecting People, Advancing Science, Promoting Trust. Springer.
Saint Louis University Institutional Review Board. (2019). Is Your Project Human Subjects Research? A Guide For Investigators. Saint Louis University.
Skloot, R. (2017). The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. Broadway Paperbacks.
SKYbrary. (n.d.). Hazard Identification.Web.
The Nuremberg Code. (1949). Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law, 10(2), 181-182. U.S. Government Printing Office.
Weindlling, P. J. (2004). Nazi Medicine and the Nuremberg Trials. Palgrave Macmillan.
World Medical Association. (1964).WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects.Web.
Žukauskas, P., Vveinhardt, J., & Andriukaitienė, R. (2018). Management Culture and Corporate Social Responsibility. IntechOpen.