The UTMB Health Institute for the Medical Humanities would like to congratulate its three December 2012 graduates: Dr. Jiin-Yu Chen, Dr. Andrew Childress, and Ms. Kimberly Gordy.
Jiin-Yu Chen earned her Doctorate (PhD) in Medical Humanities with research and a dissertation entitled "Contextualizing Science: Examining Science's Moral and Social Dimensions Using Virtue Ethics and the Humanities". Dr. Chen's dissertation committee included Howard Brody, MD, PhD, its chair; David Niesel, PhD; Jason Glenn, PhD; Anne Hudson Jones, PhD; and Jeremy Sugarman, MD, MHA, MA.
Andress Childress earned his Doctorate (PhD) in Medical Humanities with research and a dissertation entitled "Visualizing the Other: A Phenomenological Analysis of the Objectification of the Body in Biomedical Research Using Human Subjects". Dr. Childress' dissertation committee includes MIchele Carter, PhD, its chair; Judith Aronson, MD; Carl Elliott, MD, PhD; Jason Glenn, PhD; and Anne Hudson Jones, PhD.
Kimberly Gordy earned her Masters (MA) in Medical Humanities with a publication in lieu of thesis, "The 9/11 Cancer Conundrum: The Law, Policy, and Politics of the Zadroga Act". Ms. Gordy's committee included Laura Hermer, JD, LLM, its chair; Jerome Crowder, PhD; Cara Geary, MD, PhD; and William J. Winslade, PhD, JD, PhD.
Research Summaries
Dr. Chen's research can be summarized as follows:
Science and society share considerable relationships, with each shaping course of the other. Because of this, scientists have a responsibility to reflect upon their work’s social and moral dimensions when producing knowledge. Placing science within a virtue ethics framework highlights critical features for developing a contextualized and reflective science. Virtue ethics focuses on cultivating character, drawing attention to the role of the scientist’s character when producing scientifically sound knowledge and contextualizing her work. Phronêsis, or practical wisdom, helps the scientist discern a virtuous path through the multitude of options, emphasizing the importance of examining the situation from multiple perspectives and attending to the situation’s particular nuances. Reflective practice and moral imagination elaborate upon phronêsis. Reflective practice discusses how practitioners reflect upon their work by noticing small details, taking the context into account, and adjusting accordingly. In seeing the situation from other perspectives and in discerning a virtuous path, the scientist exercises moral imagination. The humanities can serve as a rich resource for cultivating these skills and exploring science’s contexts. Examining figures of the scientist begins to outline features of the public’s contradictory relationship with science and how scientists are positioned within that contested space. The figure of the ordinary scientist shows how frameworks can color how scientists approach and interpret their work. The mad scientist highlights how the scientist’s reflection on his work’s consequences is a critical factor in evaluating whether it is acceptable or not. And the heroic scientist demonstrates the need for closely reading how the characters are constructed, with the heroic scientist sharing many characteristics with the mad scientist, but are presented favorably. Taken together, these figures illustrate some features of the public’s relationship with science and demonstrate how the scientist’s character is a critical factor for practicing a contextualized and reflective science. Recent developments suggest science’s movement towards incorporating these issues into scientific practice. Translational science, which emphasizes interdisciplinary teams and community engagement, coupled with the requirement for trainees receiving federal funding to take responsible conduct of research courses highlight this shift. Developing a humanities-informed training program can further cultivate a contextualized science.
Dr. Childress' research can be summarized as follows:
Throughout the brief history of biomedical research using healthy subjects, human subjects have been treated by some clinician-investigators as mere objects of study. This scientific objectification has led to some egregious violations of human dignity. This historical pattern of dehumanizing treatment indicates that some investigators saw subjects as mere objects, undeserving of respect or recognition of their intrinsic value. In response, normative guidelines and methodological constraints have been imposed upon the scientific community to prevent future abuses. Foremost among them is the imperative that investigators show respect for research subjects as persons. However, investigators have not been trained to think of subjects as persons. Instead, the rhetoric of reductionism within medical science has perpetuated the view that persons are bodies and bodies are merely biological objects. This dissertation aims to reshape the foundation of research ethics in order to focus on embodiment and, in particular, how clinician-investigators visualize and conceptualize human research subjects’ bodies. This dissertation aims to broaden and deepen the moral vision of clinician-investigators by introducing ways of seeing the body that help uncover the intrinsic value of the human research subject. By developing an ethic of recognition, reciprocity, and respect that is grounded in an aesthetic appreciation of the subjectivity of human research subjects, medical humanists will be able to teach investigators how to cultivate a more capacious sense of respect for persons.
Ms. Gordy's research can be summarized as follows:
This Article offers the first in-depth analysis of The James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act. The World Trade Center Health Program provides first responders and survivors with medical treatment for health conditions associated with the toxic exposure at Ground Zero. At the time of publication, the Act does not cover the one condition first responders are developing at an alarmingly high rate – cancer. My research first clarifies the mechanics of the toxic exposure at Ground Zero and discusses the latent-disease development in 9/11 responders and survivors. It then outlines the political process leading to the Zadroga Act’s passage, provides an overview of the WTC Health Program, and examines the process for including a new health condition under the statute. My research concludes that, at a minimum, some form of cancer coverage must be included under the WTC Health Program’s umbrella of conditions.