3 ms·

This is what happens when people talk in vague bullshit terms instead of something concrete. "Donating a body for science" means basically nothing! A research l

by franga2000 5y ago

This is what happens when people talk in vague bullshit terms instead of something concrete. "Donating a body for science" means basically nothing! A research lab testing new medical procedures is definitely science. But is an educational display or practice for med students "science"? I'd say it's as much science as taking apart a PC is CompSci, but it looks like she would've been fine with that. So if that's fine, one could easily assume it would ve fine to do it for other interested people, no? She gave vague instructions and is now pissed that her instructions were followed to the full extent of their vagueness. The real story here should be that the event runner said they often pay $10k for a cadaver, but this lady seemingly got nothing. That is (should be) the crime here!

7952 5y ago
I guess this is why the concept of informed consent is important. There is an information imbalance between the parties involved, and it is unreasonable to expect the widow to independently rectify that. And there should be some default expectations about what is normal and what is exceptional and needs extra consent.
- franga2000 5y ago
  Of course, but again, "default expectations" is an empty term. Is this legislation? Industry regulation? A general societal norm? In the latter case, how do you "make" a societal norm? Of course, my point has that same problem - we "should" stop being vague about things that are uncomfortable to talk about, but that isn't actionable. I guess the only practical fix is to outlaw "trading" with cadavers and only allow direct donations (so there would be no way for the cadaver to go somewhere without the widow's explicit consent). Once it leaves the family, it's either used immediately or properly disposed of.
  - 7952 5y ago
    You have the concept of a reasonable person in law and that is necessary. The world changes and contracts cannot define every possiblity. Nor can you completely standardise what a professional does in their work. I think the hacker experience is to take a set of permissions and them take them to extremes. Computing makes that possible and even easy. But you can't just apply this same approach to the real world as if humans are an API.
  - 542354234235 5y ago
    You could make informed consent for donating a body similar to informed consent for a medical procedure. As the medical expert, part of obtaining informed consent involves assessing “the patient’s ability to understand relevant medical information and the implications of treatment alternatives and to make an independent, voluntary decision” [1]. You are acting as if there has to be some magic universal understanding shared among all people, when that isn’t the case. We can have a system where the expert must make a genuine attempt to explain what is happening, and assess if the layperson understands, and hold them accountable for ethics violations if they don’t. in situations with a large power or information imbalance between two parties, we don’t just have to pretend they are on equal footing and are equally accountable. [1] https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/informed-consent https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/informed-con...
  - mc32 5y ago
    This is what happens when most people follow societal norms but some exploit those norms for their own advantage. It happens a lot. People take advantage of people's general desire to be nice. And so we get things like this. I guess each and every thing we do could be codified (pretty horrific) but every day we get closer to that tyranny because libertinage.
- tinus_hn 5y ago
  It shouldn’t be too hard to specify that a carnival freakshow is not science, so they can’t use bodies donated for science.
syshum 5y ago
>>$10k for a cadaver, but this lady seemingly got nothing. That is (should be) the crime here! if that offends you, wait until you research how much money the Red Cross gets from all that donated blood.... This kind of thing is common practice, where it is illegal for an individual but there are "loop holes" where companies are not actually selling the blood, organ, etc but "transport", "collection" etc services or other related things.

7952 5y ago

I guess this is why the concept of informed consent is important. There is an information imbalance between the parties involved, and it is unreasonable to expect the widow to independently rectify that. And there should be some default expectations about what is normal and what is exceptional and needs extra consent.

franga2000 5y ago
Of course, but again, "default expectations" is an empty term. Is this legislation? Industry regulation? A general societal norm? In the latter case, how do you "make" a societal norm? Of course, my point has that same problem - we "should" stop being vague about things that are uncomfortable to talk about, but that isn't actionable. I guess the only practical fix is to outlaw "trading" with cadavers and only allow direct donations (so there would be no way for the cadaver to go somewhere without the widow's explicit consent). Once it leaves the family, it's either used immediately or properly disposed of.
- 7952 5y ago
  You have the concept of a reasonable person in law and that is necessary. The world changes and contracts cannot define every possiblity. Nor can you completely standardise what a professional does in their work. I think the hacker experience is to take a set of permissions and them take them to extremes. Computing makes that possible and even easy. But you can't just apply this same approach to the real world as if humans are an API.
- 542354234235 5y ago
  You could make informed consent for donating a body similar to informed consent for a medical procedure. As the medical expert, part of obtaining informed consent involves assessing “the patient’s ability to understand relevant medical information and the implications of treatment alternatives and to make an independent, voluntary decision” [1]. You are acting as if there has to be some magic universal understanding shared among all people, when that isn’t the case. We can have a system where the expert must make a genuine attempt to explain what is happening, and assess if the layperson understands, and hold them accountable for ethics violations if they don’t. in situations with a large power or information imbalance between two parties, we don’t just have to pretend they are on equal footing and are equally accountable. [1] https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/informed-consent https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/informed-con...
- mc32 5y ago
  This is what happens when most people follow societal norms but some exploit those norms for their own advantage. It happens a lot. People take advantage of people's general desire to be nice. And so we get things like this. I guess each and every thing we do could be codified (pretty horrific) but every day we get closer to that tyranny because libertinage.
tinus_hn 5y ago
It shouldn’t be too hard to specify that a carnival freakshow is not science, so they can’t use bodies donated for science.

syshum 5y ago

>>$10k for a cadaver, but this lady seemingly got nothing. That is (should be) the crime here! if that offends you, wait until you research how much money the Red Cross gets from all that donated blood.... This kind of thing is common practice, where it is illegal for an individual but there are "loop holes" where companies are not actually selling the blood, organ, etc but "transport", "collection" etc services or other related things.