Research Ethics Health Care System

Question: Discuss about theResearch Ethicsfor Health Care System. Answer: Introduction Benefits of Research Ethics Many research ethics are taken into consideration while conducting research. Some of the benefits are discussed below: Provide Justice Every respondent got an equal chance to participate in the research irrespective of his or her culture, tradition and characteristics (Faden et al., 2013). The research will cover every individual and take his or her concern that will be beneficial for the research. Ethical Completion of Research Faden et al., (2013) depicts that no person in future or at any time accuse the person, who conduct research for the procedure they approached. The details of the respondents are kept secret and only the decision taken by them is considered. Risks of Not Following Research Ethics Harassment The particulars of the respondents have to be protected from public exposure and, or not following the approach, some embarrassing situation might have occurred. Miller et al., (2012) depicts that some research expert do not follow the ethics and the name of the respondent and they reveal their data because of their biases. Thus the risk for breaching of the ethics is present. Legal Action Government legislations support research ethics and on not following disciplinary measures are taken against the research expert (Harriss Atkinson, 2013). Risk for legislative actions is present Protection of Respondent Millum and Sina (2014) defines that in the case of research that is based on the political consequence of a country if anonymousness is not maintained, the person may suffer from political threats and may affect their life. Thus, the risk for protection of respondent is present. Ethical Code of Conduct Morrison, (2014) depicts that in order to achieve the goals and objectives of the project, code of conduct is formulated so that each participate and the expert follow it for secures reach process and accurate research result. The principle codes of ethics are: Honesty Research expert should advance the quest for truth, knowledge and personal honesty in conducting research. Fairness The expert should ensure fairness in research practices, procedure and standards. Trust Expert should foster a climate of mutual trust so that respondent shares their original concern to the research expert. Legality The research expert has to consider valid legal norms in relations to copyright of the third party organization or for the work of other research expert Avoid Biasness The respondents are selected randomly, who are appropriate for the research and not using personal preference of the research expert. Avoid Harm to the Community The research should not harm any individual or animal during the research process is occurring. Data Protection The research experts have to protect the details of the respondents and should consider their concern on the research topic. Three Cases of Research Ethics Violations and their Consequences The first case of violating research ethics if falsifying the data and highlight the case of Dr.John Roland Darsee, a physician at Harvard University. Gross, (2016) stated that in 1981, the research scholar had already published over 100 papers. It was found that he falsified some data, which is investigated by Kloner. The suspected person made up data like it was done from several types of research on asking for showing up the data. Ptasinski, (2016) Highlights that on further investigation Darsee admitted to falsifying only this set of data and faced the consequence of lost research position at Harvard and have to withdraw from 8 papers, 32 abstracts and 9 papers, 21 abstracts from Emony and Harward respectively. In addition to that, he went into training as a critical care specialist and left the research field. The second scenario is the year 1995, where a research scholar named Jeremy Rifkin, earned a patent of plants, animals, and human body partsfor formulating a human-animal hybrid and is protested by over 200 religious leaders. The consequence is that the protest reaches up to the federal court for abusing the federalpatent review system. The protesters also depicts that the patent violates the 13th Amendment to the Constitution that emphasizes on abolished slavery." However, Resnik, (2012) mentioned that in 2005, the patent was ultimately rejected by the US PTOand legislation is passed to stop all human-animal chimeric inventions in the future. The third case that is considered is the case of 2004 where the National Institution of Health adopted Office of Science and Technology Policy misconduct. In this case, the experts in NIH plagiarized the ideas and result of other experts without giving appropriate credit. This situation not only leads to the scenario of falsification but is also liable for the fabrication of the results irrespective of the original data. Resnik et al., (2015) defines that on disclosure of this incident, NIH took the disciplinary action of debarment from eligibility to receive funds for grants and contracts from federal for the future work and suspended or termination of the scholar award. Reference List Faden, R. R., Kass, N. E., Goodman, S. N., Pronovost, P., Tunis, S., Beauchamp, T. L. (2013). An ethics framework for a learning health care system: a departure from traditional research ethics and clinical ethics.Hastings Center Report,43(s1), S16-S27. Gross, C. (2016). Scientific Misconduct.Annual review of psychology,67, 693-711. Harriss, D. J., Atkinson, G. (2013). Ethical standards in sport and exercise science research: 2014 update.International journal of sports medicine,34(12), 1025-1028. Miller, T., Birch, M., Mauthner, M. and Jessop, J. eds., 2012.Ethics in qualitative research. Sage. Millum, J., Sina, B. (2014). Introduction: international research ethics education.Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics,9(2), 1-2. Morrison, A., 2014. The Influence of Ethical Code of Conduct Enforcement on Unethical Behavior. Resnik, D. B. (2012). Research ethics timeline (1932-present).The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Resnik, D. B., Neal, T., Raymond, A., Kissling, G. E. (2015). Research misconduct definitions adopted by US research institutions.Accountability in research,22(1), 14-21.