The Creation of the Nuremberg Code: Authorship and Legacy
Date
2022-05
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
University of Delaware
Abstract
In response to Nazi human experimentation crimes, the judges of the American
Military Tribunal included a section on “Permissible Medical Experiments” in their
final opinion of the “Doctor’s Trial” of 1947. This section stated ten ethical points on
the subject of human experimentation, a list of principles that became internationally
recognized as the Nuremberg Code. This thesis explores two of the Code’s most
debated historical questions: Who should be accredited authorship of its ethical
principles? And what was the document’s legacy?
Detailed analysis of trial script, testimony, and memoranda shows that the
judges and medical experts of the trial shared authorship of the Code. Additionally,
years of past Western medical conversation also inspired the creation of the principles.
The narrative of authorship reveals how American liberalism influenced the authors of
the Code and allowed them to recognize the documents potential for international
impact. During and after the trial, the United States government promoted the
principles of the Code. This was done in accordance with postwar U.S. foreign policy,
which aimed to establish the U.S. as a leader in the new liberal world order. But
despite newfound international moral authority, the United States largely ignored the
Nuremberg Code for decades after its inception. In the years after the war, U.S.
government agencies sponsored numerous unethical human experiments. These
studies dealt with nonconsensual exposure to radiation, syphilis, and psychoactive
drugs. In light of this hypocrisy, this thesis offers a balanced interpretation of legacy.
While it features America’s disregard for the Code during the Cold War, it recognizes
the Code’s important international legacy that still serves as a beacon for medical
ethics and human rights today.
Description
Keywords
Nuremberg Code, Authorship, Ethics policy, Human rights, American liberalism