The Tuskegee Syphilis Study stands as a cautionary tale of t

The Tuskegee Syphilis Study stands as a cautionary tale of the harm that can result from unethical practices or negligence in public health.In 1932, the U.S. Public Health Service, in collaboration with the Tuskegee Institute, initiated a study of syphilis, which was a major health problem at the time. The study involved hundreds of poor, African-American sharecroppers, many of whom unknowingly had syphilis. In 1972, a multidisciplinary advisory panel reviewed the study; they halted the research after concluding that researchers failed to receive informed consent and did not give study participants proper treatment, even after penicillin became widely accepted as an effective medication for the illness. The panel called the study “ethically unjustified” because of the risks to its subjects. In the years since the study ended, the federal government and Tuskegee University have tried to repair the tremendous damage that occurred—damage measured by the loss of many lives (of study participants, as well as their wives and children who contracted syphilis) and the ensuing mistrust of government-led programs. The legacy of this study has caused many people to question when, if ever, it is acceptable to “do bad for the good of many” and sparked discussion about what can be done to promote ethical decision-making in public health.In this Discussion, you examine ethics as a guidepost for all public health decisions and analyze ethical implications for the public health issue and intervention you have selected for your Scholar-Practitioner Project. To prepare for this Discussion, review Chapter 5 in the course text. Then, reflect on your public health issue and recommended intervention. What role might ethics play in regard to your issue and intervention? What ethical dilemmas may arise? How might you address such dilemmas?By Day 4, post ethical dilemmas that may arise as you approach your public health issue and recommended intervention and why. Then, explain how you might address these dilemmas by applying ethical theories, morals, and principles. Support your post with the Learning Resources and peer-reviewed sources. Bhattacharya, D. (2013). Public health policy: Issues, theories, and advocacy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Chapter 5, “The Role of Ethics: Historical, Contemporary, and Future Perspectives” (pp.141–178)Borza, C., Rahotă, D., Mihalache, G., Buhaş, C., & Cârjan, F. (2013). The ethical qualities of a leader in public health and preventive medicine. Romanian Journal of Functional & Clinical, Macro- & Microscopical Anatomy & of Anthropology/Revista Româna de Anatomie Functionala si Clinica, Macro si Microscopica si de Antropologie, 12(2), 154–156. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.Damnariu, C. D. (2012). General principles of ethics in public health. Acta Medica Transilvanica, 17(1), 145–146. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.Lane, C. H., & Carter, M. I. (2012). The role of evidence-based media advocacy in the promotion of tobacco control policies. Salud Pública de México , 54(3), 281–288. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.Lee, L. M. (2012). Public health ethics theory: Review and path to convergence. Journal of Law, Medicine, & Ethics, 40(1), 85–98. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.Pierce, M. W., Maman, S., Groves, A. K., King, E. J., & Wyckoff, S. C. (2011). Testing public health ethics: Why the CDC’s HIV screening recommendations may violate the least infringement principle. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 39(2), 263–271. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.