Abstract
The present paper analyzes the unethical research study that was conducted by Stanley Milgram. The standards of the NASW Code of Ethics that are applicable to this case are listed in order of relevance are as follows: 1.01 Commitment to Clients, 1.03 Informed Consent, and 1.04 Competence. There is some degree to which these standards are in conflict. Regarding Commitment to Clients, Milgram focused on his own desires over the well-being of his participants. No informed consent was given and Milgram was researching a topic that had minimal research and evidence. The researcher felt that the personal value of social justice was most influential on her thought process related to the case. Conflict regarding the value of service exists between the researcher’s personal values and the NASW Code of Ethics values mentioned above. The researcher’s personal values had a profound impact on interpreting the values related to the case. Some potential steps that can be taken to resolve any future ethical issues include always attaining informed consent before performing an experiment, as well as always putting the client first. Reviews from the IRB can also prevent any unethical behavior. The Milgram study was an unethically conducted study that led to many regulations of research, which aid in preventing any further unethical studies from occurring.
The Milgram Study- Values Conflict Paper
This paper discusses the unethical study that was conducted by Dr. Stanley Milgram. Milgram created an experiment where individuals were tricked into thinking they were participating in a study to measure memory and learning, when in fact, this was inaccurate (Dunn & Chadwick, 2012). The study will be examined carefully to gain a clearer understanding of the ethical dilemmas that social workers may face if they faced with this situation. The NASW will also be scrutinized in depth, revealing three standards that the researcher found applicable to this case. These standards, in order of relevance to the present study include, 1.01 Commitment to Clients, 1.03 Informed Consent, and 1.04 Competence (NASW, 2008). Each of the standards is examined further to discover any conflict that exists between them. The researcher then discusses how her personal values are relevant to the case and any potential conflicts between her personal values and professional values. The final aspect of the paper is to review steps that were taken and future steps that can be taken in order to prevent unethical experiments, like the Milgram study, from occurring again.
Ethical Dilemma
Throughout history, there have been countless cases of unethical research that has been conducted in numerous countries all over the world. One specific case that is particularly unpalatable is the Milgram study, which took place in 1964. Unbeknownst to the participants, each subject was forced to electrically shock another person in order to examine the role that obedience and authority have on the mind (Drewry, 2004). Approximately 65 percent of the participants continued to shock the individual until the highest possible voltage was being used. Milgram’s motivation behind this experiment stemmed from researching the Holocaust, which had occurred 20 years prior. During the Holocaust, average people would commit unthinkable horrors towards other human beings (Haslam, Reicher, Millard, & McDonald, 2015). The person who experienced the shocks was a confederate and in reality, did not receive any shocks. However, the emotional trauma suffered by the participant was deplorable as measured by ethical standards of research (Drewry, 2004). In order to achieve more ethical research, social workers are provided with an ethical guide, which gives parameters for the values that are essential to members of the social work profession (Cox, Tice, & Long, 2016).
NASW Code of Ethics Standard Relevant to the Case
The NASW Code of Ethics is a document that is designed to ensure ethical behavior of all social workers. The four segments of the NASW Code of ethics include a preamble, purpose, ethical principles, and ethical standards. Utilizing these guidelines, one can practice ethical decision making, especially with regard to research (Cox et al., 2016). Three of the standards that are relevant to the Milgram study are Commitment to Clients, Informed Consent, and Competence. Each of the aforementioned standards require an in-depth analysis.
1.01 Commitment to Clients
One of the most important values that is written in the NASW Code of Ethics is 1.01, Commitment to Clients (NASW, 2008). Cannon and Buttell (2016) explained how, as social workers, whose goal is to help society by advancing the rights of human beings, the commitment one has towards clients is of utmost importance. This is specifically relevant when one is conducting research. The Milgram study is a prime example of where the commitment to clients was not a priority. Milgram was interested in how humans respond to authority by being obedient. This line of research stemmed from the Holocaust, wherein countless individuals obeyed their authority and engaged in unthinkable torture of other human beings. In completing his line of research, Milgram was committing a similar act as the Nazis, as there was no regard for the humans participating in the study (Haslam et al., 2015). Milgram’s only consideration was the research that was being conducted, rather than how this type of experiment would affect the person who was being observed. Not only were the participants not considered in the overall picture of the experiment, they were also not afforded the right to informed consent (Dunn & Chadwick, 2012).
1.02 Informed Consent
Every client is entitled to receiving informed consent concerning the experiment they are about to partake in. An individual deserves the right to know what procedures will be conducted that involves him or her. Gilberman and Gelman (2001) stated that a participant cannot be pressured into participating, and there must be a level of comprehension to understand the procedures that will take place. Information that all participants are entitled to knowing include the purpose of the study, risks, benefits, and the procedure itself. The NASW Code of Ethics (2008) explained that informed consent needs to be given in a clear and understandable way and that the researcher must go to great lengths to ensure complete clarity. In the Milgram study, the participants signed a supposed consent form. However, there was deception involved in that the participants believed they were participating in a study on memory and learning, when in fact, this was inaccurate. The participants were forced to “harm” another human being, who was a confederate, and therefore, was not actually harmed. Despite this fact, the participants believed they had harmed the individual. The participants were debriefed about the experiment and the confederate, which is a silver lining in the way the Milgram study was conducted. This experiment would have been more accepted if Milgram had any previous knowledge about the effects of authority on obedience (Dunn & Chadwick, 2012).
1.04 Competence
In the NASW Code of Ethics (2008), the topic of competence is explained in depth.
Social workers, as well as researchers, must only present themselves as having information and skill sets that they actually possess. Techniques that have not been attempted in the past or researched should not be used at all (NASW, 2008). As a researcher, dealing with the fragile human mind, Milgram should have been more knowledgeable in this area of science. As a social worker, it is integral to have a high level of competence in the work that one does. Milgram did not think about how the participants would be effected emotionally, which was unethical (Dunn & Chadwick, 2012). While each of these standards are extremely important, the level of relevance pertaining to the Milgram study, differs.
Ranked Standards of Ethical Relevance to Case
It is very hard to rank vital standards, when all are extremely important, and none should be compromised. In the opinion of the writer, the most relevant standard to this study is the commitment to clients. According to the NASW Code of Ethics (2008), Social workers overall objective is to better the world and help individuals deal with the hardships in life. Not having the individual’s best interests in mind goes against the values of the social work profession. The second most relevant standard according to the writer is the 1.03 Informed Consent. People are entitled to know what they are getting themselves into. While debriefing is integral and was done in the Milgram study, the participants should not have been deceived and believed they were participating in a study on memory and research. Informed consent is the foundation of quality and ethical research. This issue is outlined in the Belmont Report, a document created by social workers in 1978 that describes the stipulations of ethical research (Drewry, 2004). The final standard, which would be ranked third, in the order of how relevant each standard is to the Milgram study, is 1.04 Competence. While the researcher’s level of competence is fundamental in conducting ethical experiments, the other two standards are more pressing. Competence, in this case can be somewhat subjective, as Milgram was a practicing psychologist and did have some knowledge about conducting research experiments.
While it is true that Milgram did not show appropriate ethical compliance in his obedience study, he did discover many intriguing features of the human psyche. Individuals will go too far and harm another human being in order to obey authority (Dunn & Chadwick, 2012). This highlights how fragile the human mind is and how easy it is to break down a person’s morality. Milgram’s study was important to research despite the negativity associated with it. While some of the standards are blatantly obvious, some degree of conflict exists between them.
Degree of Conflict Between Standards
There is not significant conflict which exists between the standards; though, low levels of conflict still exist. Within commitment to clients, there is conflict in the researchers desire to learn unknown information and be committed to the client’s well-being at the same time. Opening doors can often lead to disruption. Sensitivity must be paramount in every case. Haslam et al. (2015) described another area where conflict may exist between portions of the standards; however, this is in respect to informed consent. In the Milgram study, the participants were not provided with their right to informed consent. Nevertheless, sometimes, an experiment requires deception in order to make sure the results are not skewed by the participants’ previous knowledge of the goal. This leads to a serious conundrum that was faced by Milgram in his own experiment. If he were to tell the participants what the goal of the experiment was, they would act differently than if deception was used. This creates a huge ethical dilemma. Additionally, the standard of competence can be a catch-22. In order to research undocumented topics, one must begin completing research. However, it is impossible to be knowledgeable about possible outcomes of a situation when said researcher is the pioneer. Haslam et al. (2015) stated that the best one could do in this situation is to debrief the participants, which Milgram did.
Personal Values Relevant to Case
An individual’s values are fundamental, as they shape their moral code and guide them through life. People develop their personal values based on past life experiences which greatly influence how circumstances are viewed. The values morph and expand as individuals grow into more aware and consciously driven persons. This is a key feature of the social work profession; knowing where one stands morally, fosters critical thinking, which is integral. According to Barsky (2010), many personal core values stood out as relevant to the Milgram study. The value of social justice was one of the values mentioned in Barsky (2010) and was especially meaningful and relevant. Social workers spend most of their time working towards the goal of social justice. In the Milgram study, social justice was overlooked. The writer believes that every person should have the right to have their social justice needs met, and the participants in the study were not provided this basic human right (Barsky, 2010).
Another personal value that was reflected in the Milgram study is helping individuals in times of need through service. While this may seem obvious and very vague, there is a great deal of depth to the statement. Barsky (2010) wrote that helping another does not always mean giving them exactly what they want, when they want it. Sometimes, in order to help someone, one must deprive them of something or give them tough love advice. This is similar to Milgram’s mentality. Milgram, in order to further the field of science and knowledge, disregarded the emotional needs of the participants. This is the exact opposite of helping people; in fact, it is hindering the individual. Keeping one’s personal values in mind when analyzing a case that
involves values is integral to gaining a comprehensive understanding of the dilemma. There
could potentially be conflict between personal and professional values (Barsky, 2010).
Potential Conflict Between Personal and Professional Values
The writer discovered only a small amount of potential conflict between her professional and personal values. One major aspect of the writer’s personal values that may facilitate conflict could be in the professional value of service. Barsky (2010) explained that keeping the individual safe and secure are easily discernable features of ethical studies. However, oftentimes, in order to further research and help society as a whole, the value of service may not remain the focus. This can be perplexing and involves a great deal of critical thinking and research. One cannot fathom the degree to which their personal values shape their interpretation of professional values.
Degree that Personal Values Shape Interpretation of Professional Values
The writer’s interpretation concerning the ethics of the Milgram study was fully shaped by existing personal values. According to Barsky (2010), although an individual’s professional values may be well established, personal values can have the potential to redefine them. It is important to utilize critical thinking skills and to be aware of one’s personal values when formulating an opinion. The most essential strategy to successful social work practice is to always have one’s professional values come before his or her personal values. One may feel many things personally, but this does not mean that everything needs to be shared and used in practice with other individuals. Every person and situation requires individualized attention, and to have a competent social worker who can keep their own opinions in check. A dilemma can only be resolved when ethical standards are in place to protect both the client and the social worker (Barsky, 2010).
Next Steps to Take to Resolve the Ethical Dilemma
There were countless steps taken to resolve the ethical dilemmas revealed in the Milgram
study. Cannon and Buttell (2016) wrote that unethical research experiments, like the Milgram
study, the Stanford Prison experiment, the Tuskegee experiment, all contributed to the creating of the institutional review boards (IRB). The IRBs monitor and approve research studies, before they can be conducted to maintain the ethical standards. One of the main features of the IRB is to make sure there is informed consent in experiments so that history will not be repeated. In addition to the IRBs being formed, the National Research Act was created in 1974 to enforce IRBs for all experiments. The Belmont Report was created to ensure that participants were being treated fairly and ethically. If the situation were to arise again, there are additional steps that one can take as a social worker. First, and foremost, informed consent is essential. Every individual is entitled to knowing what they are partaking in. Moreover, a social worker’s commitment to their clients should be of utmost importance. As a future social worker, the writer’s attention would be completely client focused. Keeping their opinions, needs, desires and sensitivities in mind are a key feature in successful social work. Not letting one’s own prejudices and values disrupt the care of a client is a worthwhile step that can be taken to remedy any ethical dilemmas, such as the Milgram study (Barsky, 2010).
Conclusion
Ethical research is the cornerstone of the science and the social work fields. Every study that is conducted requires proper professional and personal values to unite and be the foundation of every research experiment. The Milgram study is just one of many unethical experiments that were conducted with the intention of improving knowledge about the human psyche. There are many personal and professional values that were deduced from analyzing this experiment. Each of these values plays a significant role in how the writer interprets the Milgram study, forms
guidelines for what steps need to be taken to rectify this unethical research, and prevent it from
happening in the future.