A good example would be, The Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital Study (1963) in New York (National Institutes of Health, 2008). In this study, live cancer cells were being injected into chronically ill and impaired patients. They were told by the investigator they were receiving a skin test. They were never told it was live cancer cells and that the purpose of the study was about the human immune system's response to cancer (National Institutes of Health, 2008). The researcher violated the research participant's right to choose whether or not to participate in this particular study. They did not include this on the informed consent, nor inform the participant of the possible risks of the study, which looked as though the researcher, was being deceitful, and harming the research participant. .
.
Another basic human right is the informed consent. According to J. Haber, (2011), the informed consent is a voluntary consent that is required by a researcher to obtain participation from the participant in a clinical study, after informing them of all medical facts, risks and benefits involved in the research study. It must be delivered in a language that is understandable to the participant with the reading level no greater than an eight grader for adults without any medical/technical research language and documented (Haber, 2011). The informed consent is the heart of the study. It defines the purpose of the study, the risks and benefits of the study, discomforts, how long the study will take place, location, how research will be conducted. The informed consent can be violated if the researcher leaves one element from the consent form, such as, the risks of the study or is not in language which is comfortable to the research participant (National Institutes of Health, 2008). This does not help the research participant to make a wise decision about whether or not to participate in the study of the participant cannot comprehend the consent.
