devry laws420h week 3 discussions latest 2015 winter

Following World War II, leading Nazi doctors were brought to justice before the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. Twenty doctors were charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity. The Nuremberg trial of the doctors revealed evidence of sadistic human experiments conducted at the Dachau, Auschwitz, Buchenwald, and Sachsenhausen concentration camps.

Since the Nuremberg trials, our society has had to confront the reality that Nazi doctors were guilty of premeditated murder that was masqueraded as research. Professional modern medicine has had little difficulty condemning the Nazi doctors as evil men. But what is being said of the continued use of the Nazi doctors' medical research? Many scholars are now discovering that there are multiple references in reputable medical literature to Nazi experiments and republished works of former SS (elite corps of the Nazi Party) doctors. These studies and references frequently bear no disclaimer as to how the data were obtained. In recent years, several scientists who have sought to use the Nazi research have attracted attention, and this has stirred widespread soul searching about the social responsibility and potential abuses of science.

These incidents prompt a number of questions for the scientific community. Is it ever appropriate to use data as morally repugnant as that which was extracted from victims of Nazism? If so, under what circumstances would this be acceptable? If it is discovered that the Nazi doctors learned about the basic building blocks for a cure for cancer that would, if used as part of current and legitimate research, be the missing link that would save millions of lives, should this tainted data be used? If used, should limitations or conditions be placed on what can be done with a percentage of the profits that any drugs traced to this data would generate (e.g., requiring that the profits to be donated to the survivors of concentration camps)?

Source to Consider:

It seems reasonable and unproblematic to say that we may be loyal to other human beings because they are flesh and blood entities. But what about loyalty to a business? When we feel loyal to a corporation, is it the business for which we are expressing loyalty or are we actually being loyal to the people who are within that business? Should people be encouraged to or discouraged from feeling loyalty to companies? If the business actively encourages a sense of loyalty among its employees, does the business morally owe something more than a typical severance package if it must terminate a worker’s employment?

This section lists options that can be used to view responses.