Human Rights at Home and Abroad: Past, Present, and Future

health. Scientists can also create more experiments to improve the medical field. This will help the
population‘s health.
The Nuremberg Code is meant for all humans who are involved in human testing. What about the
almost developed humans in the womb? Would these terms still apply? Drawing embryonic fluids from
an expecting mother can predict disabilities or diseases an infant. Since the embryonic fluid is being used
for research, do doctors have a right to invade the mother, as well as the embryonic sac of the infant to
draw fluid? This also can be similar to the debate about abortions whether or not the child is alive and has
the right to live since they are entitled to their human rights. Shafer (1983) adds, (from a critique of Hans
Jonas), ―those who are least able to give voluntary and informed consent should be the last chosen as
subjects for hazardous research,‖ (p. 79) and from this kind of viewpoint, can conclude that scientists do
not have the right to test infants. Scientists would be violating the baby‘s human rights because they are
being used as a hazardous type of research. Since the parents are the ones who ultimately make the
decision and are allowing doctors and scientists to test embryonic fluids, they are giving their consent to
scientists to test their infant for any abnormalities.
Therefore, the baby and mother‘s rights would be protected if the guidelines of the Nuremberg
Code are being followed properly. A poll was taken that asked a sample of parents if they would choose
to abort if certain types of illnesses and disabilities for their future infant were discovered during
pregnancy. Rabino (2003) concluded this research by stating the percentages of parents that thought
abortion was ethical; ―82% be severely mentally retarded, 76% die of a disease by age four, 62% develop
a severe childhood disease, or 43% die of a disease as a young adult (p. 376). These are the top four
reasons parents thought abortions were ethical if they found out if their child would fit into any of these
categories. Research by ―Wertz and Fletcher (1995)…someone who knowingly brings a child into the
world with a serious genetic disorder is "not fair to the child," (Rabino, 2003, p.376). So, although this
type of human testing seems to be viewed negatively, to most parents, it can be a helpful tool to ensure
their future child is going to live a healthy long life.
149