Ethical Violations in "The Monster Study" Essay

The Monster Study was conducted by Wendell Johnson and Mary Tudor at the University of Iowa in 1939. The purpose of this experiment was to see how positive speech affected orphan children. They also wanted to find out if stutters were genetic or formed because of the environment the child was exposed to. Twenty two orphan children were chosen to be the test subjects. Only ten of the children had a stutter. They were split into two groups. One group received positive praises and the other group received negative encouragement. None of the kids knew what they were being tested for.

A phenomenon applicable to the vast field of Speech-Language Pathology, and the foundation of research now and in the future can all be attributed to, difference versus disorder. This concept considers the complexities of those served within the profession and highlights the range of possibilities displayed from an individual, that draws a fine line between a person being labeled as having a dialectal difference or a speech and/or language disorder. A difference can be defined as an alteration in an individual’s speech and/or language that can be attributed to internal and external factors such as race, culture, and the environment in which a person lives. In contrast, a disorder is an actual disability that interferes with a person’s speech

On March 7, 2016, I observed Makenzie Cockerill in room A117 from 10:00-10:45 am. The client was preschool-aged. The clinician informed me that the client had low intelligibility. The objectives of the day were to work on the /b/ sounds and beginning vowel sounds. The clinician also planned to do a mini screening of Child Apraxia of Speech. However, she informed me that she didn’t believe that this was the case in the child, but they wanted to rule it out. The client had multiple speech sounds in error, so the clinician implemented a cyclical strategy.

As Child A was a child who had difficulty with speech, observations of speech therapy were taken place regularly. A practitioner would work with Child A, on different occasions, to ensure that his speech was improving. Here the observations that would take place were planned, as Child A was asked to read words on a piece of paper to see if he was able to pronounce them correctly. Words that were successfully pronounced were noted, whilst words which were harder to pronounce were marked down as

The Willowbrook research also contributed to the public debate over research ethics and the impetus for regulation” (NAP, 2004). This research does not downplay the egregious acts of the research or coercing family members or guardians to consent to the research study through allowing entry into the school via the experiment venue. The residents of the school suffered while being exposed to a live hepatitis virus and while living in severely unsanitary conditions with undertrained and unsupervised staff that performed acts of violence on residents of the school. “Children were sitting on the floor, some nude covered in feces, rocking back and forth making pitiful sounds. Willowbrook was a state school, yet there was very little education happening. This was simply a dumping ground for the city’s unwanted children. The staff, overwhelmed and under-supervised, resorted to prison-style control tactics: disruptive residents were confined in solitary ‘‘pits’’ and left for hours or were beaten with keys and sticks” (Starogannis & Hill, 2008, p. 89). Evidently the research setting was not the optimal setting; the research was performed during a time when guidelines were nonexistent. Protection of the residents was put aside to reach for a vaccine that would aid many more than were affected which places into question the ethical behaviors of the determining entities.

When the experiment was conducted at this orphanage none of the children were told about the intent of the research. In fact, they believed that they were to going to receive speech therapy and were promised incentives such as Christmas parties. These children did not give consent, were lied to, and were mentally and emotionally harmed. The speech of all subjects was reduced, their rate of speaking decreased, the length of their replies was shorter, and they were more aware and embarrassed of their speech

The other 12 children were chosen randomly between the ages of 5 and 15 and in that group, they split them evenly into the control and experimental group. They came to the conclusion that diagnosing stuttering early can cause stuttering. The children were scared to speak most of the time. They were scared to stutter and were always overthinking it. This experiment also affected the way they acted at school and interacted with others.

Describe the ethical implications of the researchers’ actions and the lack of medical treatment given to research participants in both studies

(1963) studies would confront several violations to the APA Code of Ethics: IRB authorization, informed consent, and risk of harm. The APA Code of Ethics states that researchers must obtain an approval from IRBs prior any study takes place. Additionally, it also states that informed consent from parents when minors are involved must be obtained. Furthermore, consent of minor participants should be taken also into consideration. More importantly, this code stipulates that participants must not be at risk of harm; this includes physical and emotional distress, (Koocher & Keith-Spiegel, 2008).

Another issue of doing research with foster children is the reality that some of those children might be being abused. The issue of consent is again complicated because of the relationship between abused child and abusive guardian. Kinard provides three special situations where procedures for interviewing an abused child might need provisions: when a child is distressed by the interviewing or testing; when a child’s answers or test results indicate emotional problems; and when a child’s answers or comments indicate that the child is being abused. Kinard comments that the decision regarding whether to inform the guardian and/or others about the child’s answers must balance a guardian’s right to know against the child’s right to privacy. However, she notes that the decisions made under these circumstances require intense deliberations (1985).-need to put in quotes? Or change wording-exact copy from study

Have you or anyone around you ever been involved in an experiment that some would call unwanted or unethical? Perhaps maybe even it happening to young children, It may surprise you how often unethical experimenting has been documented throughout the nation no less worldwide, and no less to very young children. This has been happening for years throughout history and still even today. However, this is a very highly debated topic as what someone would constitute a certain experiment unethical, others may count it as perfectly normal. Whether it is the case of Dr. Lauretta Bender, or the ever so famous case of the University of Iowa Speech therapy experiment, you are sure to find various amount of cases of unethical

Many speech language pathologists (SLPs), after diagnosing a child with stuttering are left with the problems of what treatment program should be implemented and what are the chances that the

Psychological research has been growing and developing new ways of studying human behavior, collecting knowledge and expanding our understanding of our nature. For instance, studies involving human subjects presented risks for violation of ethical research guidelines, by pushing the limits of human experience (Kim, 2012). Throughout history, there have been numerous studies that elevated this concern, such as the Milgram Experiment of 1963. One of the major ethical raised was that it lacked informed consent from the participants and eventually raised the issue of protecting human subjects. This paper examines the ethical compliance in psychological research and emphasizes the importance of ethics and professionalism by analyzing different

Ethical guidelines are the frameworks and standards that govern psychologists in conducting a morally justified research to respect the rights of the participants. Since the researchers are responsible for the welfare of the participants, it is vital for them to act in accordance with a specific strict code of ethics and moral principles. One of the common ethical framework used in many psychological studies is IVCARD where ‘I’ stands for Informed Consent, ‘V’ equals Voluntary Participation, ‘C’ is Confidentiality, ‘A’ being Accurate Reporting, ‘R’ is Right To Withdraw and ‘D’ as Do No Harm. Although there are few disadvantages of these strict ethical guidelines, the advantages outweigh them. This is evident from two of the

We are going to explore the world of ethical issues in psychology. As in any medical or mental health fields there are rules we all must follow as professionals. In this essay today we will be exploring a case study where we have a young lady who has been stricken by a mental disability. We will be looking at the facts in which her disability was handled by a professional in the field of psychology. We also will be discussing the rights and wrongs that are presented in her case study. We will also be discussing the APA ethical codes and gain a clearer understanding of where some things went wrong and why shall we begin.