Andrew Wakefield

(Alvin Lo, Danely Gonzales, Xeon Gutierrez, Sriram Hariharan)

In 1998, Andrew Wakefield conducted a study, which has since been discredited, on the correlation between MMR (Measles, Mumps, and Rubella) vaccines and the development autism. Wakefield lost his medical license due to his unethical practices through which he conducted and funded his research, but the scorn he has received from the medical community and public health officials seems to only fuel his belief in his findings.

The effects of the study can be observed, even nearly two decades after the initial findings. Over the years after the report, the MMR vaccine had vaccination rates “so low that childhood diseases once all but eradicated here … have re-emerged” (Dominus 1). Wakefield has, for his own benefits, created a large public panic. In addition, some methods that Wakefield utilized to obtain data, including “[lining] up kids to give blood samples at a birthday party … [for] £5” can be described as illegal, immoral, and unethical (Dominus 1). This event became one of numerous occasions in which Wakefield had unethically generated results for his study, perhaps giving other researchers a reason that the results of the study was unable to be replicated and the medical board a reason to revoke Wakefield’s license in January 2010.

However, Andrew Wakefield did not think himself the villain many portray him to be. As one of his main opponents, British journalist Brian Dreer said, “He believed it was true”. (Dominus 1)  He found his actions justified in that he felt that he was helping children, believing that his unethical behavior and actions would help him achieve more financing for more research. This is a textbook example of framing, with him changing his judgement of an unethical choice by impacted by how the situation is posed. Another example of framing can be seen in his parent followers: the parents of child 9 and 10 were connected to Mrs. 2, who “ran a group that campaigned against MMR” (Deer 4). The possible existence of additional benefits can easily impact the decision-making of an individual, hence presenting additional issues when ethics and morals is considered.

            New York Times writer, Susan Dominus, alludes to a possibility of Wakefield deceiving himself, justifying his actions and experiment to himself as a result of loss aversion. “For Wakefield, the attacks have become a kind of affirmation. The more he must defend his research, the more important he seems to consider it,” wrote Dominus. This bears a resemblance to loss aversion because as he continues to loses the battle against the scientific community, he continues to fight to keep his research’s “findings” alive through the parents of autistic children. His actions are misled because his attempts for self-preservation have made parents turn their back on life-saving vaccines. Because of his confidence in his beliefs, he was led to shady practices and disastrous results. Even if he truly believes in his research conclusion, his mentality of “the ends justifying the means” is completely inexcusable.

In conclusion, Andrew Wakefield fell in the trap of justifying his unethical behavior through a variety of reasons from lying to his colleges, patients, and twisting allegations to explain his actions as merely taking advantage of the loopholes in society. These can be countered by further educating others on what truly crosses the fine line of ethics and reminding them of the consequences of unethical actions, so that events similar to this would not happen again. 

Works Cited

Dominus, Susan. “The Crash and Burn of an Autism Guru.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 23 Apr. 2011, www.nytimes.com/2011/04/24/magazine/mag-24Autism-t.html.

Deer, Brian. “How the Case Against the MMR Vaccine Was Fixed.” BMJ: British Medical Journal, vol. 342, no. 7788, 8 Jan. 2011, pp. 77–82.