Honors 9th Literature for STEM

Writing an Argumentative Essay - OUTLINE

An argument is a discussion in which reasons are put forward in support of and against a claim. A written argument must
meet several conditions in order to be a valid argument and not merely an effort to persuade.
1. The central claim needs to be debatable.
2. The claim must be supported by evidence.
3. The writer needs to address the opposition by acknowledging counterclaims and the evidence supporting them.

With these conditions in mind, consider the following elements of an effective argument:
● Introduction and claim: an opening that grabs the reader’s attention while informing the reader of the claim,
which is a clear and straightforward statement of the writer’s beliefs about the topic of the argument. Let’s first
brainstorm ways to set up our introduction.
Introduce Henrietta Lacks is an African American woman who died of cervical cancer. Her cells were taken for science
the topic: and helped researchers develop and discover diseases and create cures using her immortal cells that lived even
after she died. They were the first immortal human cell line.

Define Henrietta’s cells saved years of time and effort and saved thousands of lives. Despite the benefit found from her
the issue: cells, the way her cells were taken from her was a violation of privacy. George Gey, the doctor who grew the
first immortal cell line, retrieved the cells by taking some of Henrietta’s tissues and culturing it without the
knowledge of Henrietta or her family. The question rises; does the “good” of humanity and science outweigh the
right of the individual?
Introduce Rebecca Skloot, the author of “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks” explored the journey Henrietta and her
the Texts: family took during and after the discovery of Henrietta’s immortal cells. During this journey Henrietta and her
family experienced many events that changed their life while also changing the world. Rebecca Skloot also
wrote a text briefly explaining the life of Henrietta and her contributions to science called “Henrietta’s Dance”.
In this text, she explains the life of Henrietta Lacks in a brief and condensed way. Henrietta’s life and family
were also explored in a video from ABC news explaining the struggles and life of Henrietta Lacks.

Consider the writing prompt again. Write your claim/thesis here:

Claim/ The “good” of humanity and science doesn’t outweigh the right of the individual because it’s not equitable for
Thesis: the individual to be unaware of things happening in their own bodies. For instance, Henrietta had cells taken
from her without her or her family’s permission. That was a violation of privacy and human rights. Its
imperative for a patient who gets tissues/cells extracted from there body to be informed about that because
scientists could effortlessly make a profit from that and the family or individual wouldn’t know just as the Lacks
family. Scientists made millions and millions of dollars from HeLa cells and the Lacks family didn’t receive a
portion of it and they didn’t know about it until decades following Henrietta’s death.
● Supporting paragraphs: the reasons offered in support of a claim, supported by different types of evidence.
Consider the reasons why you believe your claim is true. Use at least one source in each body paragraph. Use the
table below to list your reasons and the evidence that supports your reasons.
Reasons Evidence
Example: Individuals with college degrees ● “Workers with more education have lower unemployment […] than workers with less
have more job security than those without education” (“Education Still Pays” 66).
college degrees.*
● Chart on page 67: Bachelor’s degree = 4.0% unemployment rate while high school
diploma = 7.5% unemployment rate

*The argument here is that a college **Be sure to use direct quotes so you can easily transfer them into your body paragraphs. Always
education is valuable. include citations in your outline so you don’t have to search for quotes/information when you’re
actually drafting. If your source has an author printed, cite as follows (Last Name 34) with the page
number. If no author is listed, use the article title in quotation marks before the page number.

Doctors and scientists should get Doctors such as George Gey should have gotten permission or approval
permission/consent from a patient form at least the Lacks family before he extracted tissues from Henrietta.
before they do anything that The same should go for any individual who needs (or doesn’t need) an
involves the extraction of
tissues/cells.
Profits made from an individual’s
body parts/cells should give the
individual the right to obtain some
of the money made from
commercial uses.
extraction of tissues from their body. Its not appropriate to take tissues form
one’s body and use them and benefit from them when the patient and/or the
patient’s family doesn’t know. For example, George Gey took tissues from
Henrietta without her knowing. He later cultured them, researched them,
and sold them. They created a complete and successful cell line. The least
Gey should have done was to inform Henrietta or her family. It’s true that
before, laws like having consent from the patients before extracting tissues
from them wasn’t required, but today, doctors should take the extra step and
inform a patient of any extraction needed to be done. According to Judith
Greenberg in the book of “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks” she
states, “it’s very important for donors to understand what the consequences
of tissue research might be,” (Skloot pg.318). It’s imperative to allow
patients to decide what will happen to their body understand what
scientists/doctors will do in order to do the most ethical thing in such
situations. According to ABC news, “When they were finally told in the
1970s, they were stunned, and then angry” (ABC news). Despite the
contribution’s HeLa cells made to science, such as scientists being able to
understand cells and diseases in a more advanced way, and discovering
cures for common diseases, it was unethical to take cells from an individual
solely for scientific researchers. It impacted her family in a very negative
way, knowing that they were untold about things that changed the world
through her mother’s cells. Although in the 1950s it wasn’t a standard thing
to tell patients when they are getting tissues extracted, Johns Hopkins
Hospital should’ve informed the Lacks family as soon as they grew the
HeLa cells. Scientists should be more aware of the person in which they
would extract cells from, and the individual/patient in which the cells will
be extracted from, should be in knowledge of what will happen to their
body.
When a patient gets body parts/tissues/cells extracted from their body for
medical reasons or a donation, and the scientist or the doctor manages to get
a profit out of these body parts, the individual or the individual’s family in
which scientist benefitted out of his/her cells should be able to benefit off
the profits made from them because the profits wouldn’t have been made if
it wasn’t for the individual to give the cells to science. As of Henrietta’s
case, the medical industry made millions and millions of dollars off her
cells and her family did not know about any of it until a few decades
following her death. Henrietta’s family was living in poverty and wasn’t
even able to have proper health insurance to cover for all of the health
problems they had. According to the book, “The Immortal Life of Henrietta
Lacks” states, “Lawrence yelled, ‘but they made millions! It’s not fair! She’s the
most important person in the world and her family is living in poverty. If our
mother so important to science, why can’t we get health insurance?’” (Skloot
pg.168) Scientists where making millions of dollars while Henrietta’s family were
living in poverty and couldn’t even afford to pay for health insurance. Health
insurance would’ve been the least doctors can do to thank Henrietta and her
family. According to the book, “Day had prostate cancer and asbestos-filled lungs.
Sonny had a bad heart, Deborah had arthritis, osteoporosis, nerve deafness,
anxiety, and depression. With all that plus the whole family’s high blood pressure
and diabetes,” (Skloot pg. 168-169) The Lacks family was struggling with their
 current health status and that was because they couldn’t afford health insurance.
Scientists shouldn’t give all the profits made from the individual’s cells, but they
should give a portion of it. Doctors should give even more to families and people
who are struggling and in poverty such as the Lacks family.
● Counterclaim: the writer’s arguments against those opposing viewpoints (also called refutations), explaining
why the writer’s position is more valid. Complete the table below to prepare your counterargument:

Others may Their evidence is… Their argument is not valid

argue… because…
(counterclaim)

Others may argue Their evidence is that if scientists extracted cells from Their argument based on scientist
that scientists patients without them knowing, then scientists can being able to extract tissues from
should be allowed discover cures for common diseases and develop more patients without them knowing is
to extract cells vaccines faster than if they had to get consent from a invalid because a patient needs to
patient to extract cells. Also, if someone were to take become aware of all the things that
from patients
something that belongs to you, even if you allowed that, are happening to their body, they
without them
there will always be curiosity of what is going to happen might refuse, but that is personal
knowing and that to that thing because it once belonged to the patient or the freedom and no one should control
the profits made owner. Therefore, the patient might refuse to allow their that.
from the cells cells to be used for research allowing less discoveries and
should not go to vaccines would be discovered at a slower rate. In the
the patient in book, it states, “like it or not, we live in a market-driven
which the cells society, and science is part of that market” (Skloot
came from pg.325). People must know that science is a part of life
and it shouldn’t be made an option for patients to
determine whether they should have their tissues taken for
science or not.
Their evidence to patients not receiving any of the profits
made from their cells is that if patients are given the
access to obtain profits made off their cells, it would
hinder scientific research because the profit made from
commercializing cells could be used for further research
on an area of medical study. According to the book,
“without commercialization, companies wouldn’t make
the drugs and diagnostic tests so many of us depend on”
(Skloot pg.322) They would argue that patients shouldn’t
receive any money from the profits made even if they
were in poverty such as the Lacks family because that
would reduce the potential of research and study that
could be done on the particular cells

● Conclusion/call to action: closing statements restating the major arguments in defense of a claim with a final
challenge to the reader to take action. Brainstorm ideas for your conclusion below:
How will you In conclusion, patients shouldn’t be unaware of what doctors are doing to them. Especially if
summarize/revisit its something involving the extraction of tissues as George Gey extracted tissues from
the topic? Henrietta without her permission. Nowadays people need to be fully aware and
knowledgeable about what doctors are going to do to their bodies such as tissue extraction.
Doctors should also keep in mind that if profits are made from an individual’s cells, the
individual should have a share of the profits made because without the donation of t heir cells
to science, the profits wouldn’t have been made. Additional amounts of money should be
added and given especially towards an individual or an individual’s family who is suffering
 from poverty such as Henrietta’s family.
How will you restate It’s imperative to allow patients to be knowledgeable about what happen to their body as well
your claim? as allowing them to receive a portion of the profits made from their cells. Its important to
inform the patient of what happens to their body because the patient might not allow for the
cells to be extracted and they have a right to refuse because its personal freedom. Patients
should also have the right to receive a portion of the profits made because they wouldn’t be
made without the patient’s cells.
How will you People and doctors should take action to give patients the right to control and know what
challenge your happens to their body as well as having a portion of the profits made by people supporting
reader to take human rights to privacy and knowledge. Patients undergoing surgery should sign a paper of
action? consent that assure the doctor whether the patient is fine with what will happen to any
extractions from the body or not. Doctors and scientists should also make sure that patients
receive a portion of any profits made from the cells. The patient should always stay up to date
with their cells and the process undergoing them.

Consider the following before you move forward with your draft. Has your argument achieved these major purposes?
● Changed or enforced reader’s point of view
● Asked the reader to take an action

Now you are ready to write your draft.

The “good” of humanity and science outweigh the right of the individual because for instance, Henrietta had cells taken
from her without her or her family’s permission to take them but they ended up helping all of humanity because scientists
were able to discover things about cells they never knew before and that eventually helped scientists find cures to
common diseases that saved thousands and thousands of lives and they continue to. Her cells also were used for
commercial exploitation in which her family should have had a share of it since they were living in poverty and
desperately needed money.

Doctors such as George Gey should be able to extract tissues from a person’s body without their permission as
long as it wouldn’t affect the health of the individual in which his/ her tissues where extracted from. In
Henrietta’s case, George Gey extracted tissues from Henrietta’s cervix while she was in a painful state, but the
extraction of the tissue soon became the first immortal human cell line; HeLa. According to “Henrietta’s
Dance”, it states, “He and his wife, Margaret, had been searching for a tool for the study of cancer: a line of
human cells that would live indefinitely outside the body. If they succeeded, they could observe and test human
cells in ways they could never do in humans. Eventually, they could discover the cure for cancer” (Skloot par.4)
after decades of Gey researching for a cell line in which he could study cancer in, he found the immorality in
HeLa cells which allowed him and other scientists to study cells in a more advanced way that allowed scientists
to discover common diseases and develop cures for them, which saved thousands of lives. The sacrifice of one
life (Henrietta’s life) for the life of thousands of others made Henrietta’s life very valuable and important as
shown in the book “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks” by Rebecca Skloot