What was Rebecca Skloot's point of view toward the subject?Was she biased or persuasive?
Reading this book opens up so many questions about ethics, race and science. The impact that this story has had on science is unbelievable, yet the impact it has on a person and they're families can be devastating.
Rebecca Skloot is a science writer, who writes about science and medicine. Going into writing this story, she had a very scientific mind about things. She believes in medicine and in science, however in writing this book, she also saw another side to equation. She realized that this was a real person. She also realized what Henrietta's family has gone through all these years. During the time that Henrietta went for treatment and had her tissues harvested, there were no legal ramifications set up for people's consent. Although Henrietta was a poor black woman, that really had no reason on why she wasn't asked for her consent. This was just the standard procedure. There are tons of cells and tissues still used today, that we don't know where or who they came from. That in turn does not give a person the right to take something form someone, without consulting the family.
In my opinion, Rebecca Skloot shows us that although she believes in medicine and science, she also believes in the dignity of a human being. She also believes in the rights to Henrietta's family. She was neither biased nor persuasive. She was stating the facts about what had happened, and the ramifications, both good and bad, that this story has on all of us. It all comes down to a matter of ethics and the the impact that science has on medicine today.