What are the ethical implications of Edward Jenner’s testing of the smallpox vaccine on a child?

Sourav PanNovember 9, 2024

Answered step-by-step

The ethical implications of Edward Jenner’s testing of the smallpox vaccine on a child, specifically his experiment involving James Phipps, raise significant concerns when evaluated through the lens of modern medical ethics. Here are the key points regarding the ethical considerations surrounding Jenner’s actions:

1. Informed Consent

• Lack of Informed Consent: At the time of Jenner’s experiment in 1796, the concept of informed consent as understood today did not exist. James Phipps, an eight-year-old boy, was subjected to an experimental procedure without any formal consent process, and it is unclear whether his parents fully understood the risks involved. Modern ethical standards require that participants (or their guardians) be fully informed about the nature of the research, potential risks, and benefits before agreeing to participate.

2. Risk vs. Benefit

• Risk to the Child: Jenner’s experiment involved deliberately exposing Phipps to smallpox after initially inoculating him with cowpox. While Jenner believed he was providing protection against a deadly disease, he exposed the child to significant risk, including the possibility of severe illness or death from smallpox. Modern ethical principles emphasize minimizing harm (non-maleficence) and ensuring that the potential benefits of research outweigh the risks involved.

3. Ethical Standards of the Time

• Contextual Ethics: It is essential to consider the historical context in which Jenner operated. At that time, variolation (deliberately infecting individuals with smallpox to confer immunity) was a common practice, albeit risky. Jenner’s approach aimed to provide a safer alternative through vaccination with cowpox. However, while this may have been seen as innovative and beneficial at the time, contemporary ethical standards would deem such an experiment unacceptable due to the lack of rigorous safety protocols and oversight.

4. Exploitation and Coercion

• Power Dynamics: Jenner conducted his experiment on the son of his gardener, raising concerns about coercion and exploitation. The power dynamics between a physician and a subordinate could lead to questions about whether true voluntary consent was possible. Modern ethics emphasize protecting vulnerable populations from being unduly influenced or coerced into participating in research.

5. Scientific Rigor and Oversight

• Lack of Scientific Rigor: The experiment lacked a robust scientific design by today’s standards. It involved only one subject (James Phipps), making it difficult to draw valid conclusions about the vaccine’s efficacy or safety based on such limited data. Contemporary research ethics require well-designed studies with appropriate sample sizes and controls to ensure reliable results.