Cargando…

The Nuremberg Code–A critique

The Nuremberg Code drafted at the end of the Doctor’s trial in Nuremberg 1947 has been hailed as a landmark document in medical and research ethics. Close examination of this code reveals that it was based on the Guidelines for Human Experimentation of 1931. The resemblance between these documents i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Ghooi, Ravindra B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3121268/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21731859
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2229-3485.80371
_version_ 1782206810859503616
author Ghooi, Ravindra B.
author_facet Ghooi, Ravindra B.
author_sort Ghooi, Ravindra B.
collection PubMed
description The Nuremberg Code drafted at the end of the Doctor’s trial in Nuremberg 1947 has been hailed as a landmark document in medical and research ethics. Close examination of this code reveals that it was based on the Guidelines for Human Experimentation of 1931. The resemblance between these documents is uncanny. It is unfortunate that the authors of the Nuremberg Code passed it off as their original work. There is evidence that the defendants at the trial did request that their actions be judged on the basis of the 1931 Guidelines, in force in Germany. The prosecutors, however, ignored the request and tried the defendants for crimes against humanity, and the judges included the Nuremberg Code as a part of the judgment. Six of ten principles in Nuremberg Code are derived from the 1931 Guidelines, and two of four newly inserted principles are open to misinterpretation. There is little doubt that the Code was prepared after studying the Guidelines, but no reference was made to the Guidelines, for reasons that are not known. Using the Guidelines as a base document without giving due credit is plagiarism; as per our understanding of ethics today, this would be considered unethical. The Nuremberg Code has fallen by the wayside; since unlike the Declaration of Helsinki, it is not regularly reviewed and updated. The regular updating of some ethics codes is evidence of the evolving nature of human ethics.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3121268
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Medknow Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31212682011-07-01 The Nuremberg Code–A critique Ghooi, Ravindra B. Perspect Clin Res Ethics The Nuremberg Code drafted at the end of the Doctor’s trial in Nuremberg 1947 has been hailed as a landmark document in medical and research ethics. Close examination of this code reveals that it was based on the Guidelines for Human Experimentation of 1931. The resemblance between these documents is uncanny. It is unfortunate that the authors of the Nuremberg Code passed it off as their original work. There is evidence that the defendants at the trial did request that their actions be judged on the basis of the 1931 Guidelines, in force in Germany. The prosecutors, however, ignored the request and tried the defendants for crimes against humanity, and the judges included the Nuremberg Code as a part of the judgment. Six of ten principles in Nuremberg Code are derived from the 1931 Guidelines, and two of four newly inserted principles are open to misinterpretation. There is little doubt that the Code was prepared after studying the Guidelines, but no reference was made to the Guidelines, for reasons that are not known. Using the Guidelines as a base document without giving due credit is plagiarism; as per our understanding of ethics today, this would be considered unethical. The Nuremberg Code has fallen by the wayside; since unlike the Declaration of Helsinki, it is not regularly reviewed and updated. The regular updating of some ethics codes is evidence of the evolving nature of human ethics. Medknow Publications 2011 /pmc/articles/PMC3121268/ /pubmed/21731859 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2229-3485.80371 Text en © Perspectives in Clinical Research http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Ethics
Ghooi, Ravindra B.
The Nuremberg Code–A critique
title The Nuremberg Code–A critique
title_full The Nuremberg Code–A critique
title_fullStr The Nuremberg Code–A critique
title_full_unstemmed The Nuremberg Code–A critique
title_short The Nuremberg Code–A critique
title_sort nuremberg code–a critique
topic Ethics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3121268/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21731859
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2229-3485.80371
work_keys_str_mv AT ghooiravindrab thenurembergcodeacritique
AT ghooiravindrab nurembergcodeacritique