Catholic Catechism Question

The idea that, "the end does not justify the means", is a very true statement to me. A person should not be able to do wrong and say because it did one good thing that it was the right thing to do. Going to an extreme for this hypothetical if a Nazi scientist killed and experimented on Jewish prisoners and then cured polio would it still be ethically correct? Which most people would say no while others may say yes because it cured their polio. It depends on what your own personal beliefs. The loving your neighbor as yourself fits in with this because we all have rights and dignity we should not try to use each other as a means to an end. I would say that, "the end does not justify the means", is an ethical problem in the sense that not everyone follows it. An example of this would be the scientists in the Henrietta Lacks books which would be their making millions by using her cells to cure disease by stealing them and not giving back to her family or telling Henrietta her cells had been taken. I'm not sure if there is a solution to making sure that people follow this rule/statement other than making some law that prohibits certain actions so that the end isn't found through unjustifiable means.

Should scientists and major companies be able to patent cells?

I don't think that companies should have the right to patent cells. In the afterword section of the book The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks by Rebecca Skloot there is a section about this, "This means pharmaceutical companies, scientists, and universities control what research can be done on those genes, and how much resulting therapies and diagnostic tests will cost" (323). This means that these groups can charge very unreasonable amounts of cash so that no one can create a cure for certain disease and monopolize the industry.


 Rebecca Skloot. The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. Broadway Books, 2010. Print.

Inequality discussion

For the part of inequality disscussion I was a part of before I moved to listen to the assisted suicide group to hear their discussion was about income in equality. In the book Henrietta and her family are bellow the poverty line which is shown through the use of the free clinic and later on the fact that they could not afford health insurance. This could also be due to the fact that because of segregation they could not afford a quality education which could have lead into a better job to get them above the poverty line.

Why is chapter 23 called "It's Alive"?

The chapter is called "It's Alive" because this is when Henrietta's family finally finds out about her cells still being alive, but still don't know much about them. I feel like the title is a homage to the 1931 film Frankenstein. The title alludes to in my opinion the fact that the cells are still alive all this time and like in the 1931 film the Lack's family will get a surprise like Dr. Frankenstein.