The Inability to Retaliate as a Key Constituent of Vulnerability in Research

Abstract: "Vulnerability is said many ways," writes Achella (2023) in a recent book chapter. Indeed, although vulnerability is a guiding value for much modern bioethics, the concept itself is mercurial. Interpretations of vulnerability as being merely a state of increased susceptibility to harm are either analytically true, or are empirically false, based on the exact way one means that identification. In this paper, rather than undertake a complete conceptual critique of vulnerability, I suggest that there is an important aspect of vulnerability that is overlooked: the (in)ability to retaliate. Said another way, a key way a research population can be vulnerable is if it is unable to retaliate to harms done to it. To suggest why this is the case, I undertake a selective historical survey centered around the guiding question "when nefarious actors search for vulnerable populations, what attributes do they seek out?" By an examination of the CIA's activities in conjunction with Albert Kligman's research at Holmesburg Prison in Philadelphia, especially as read through Mark Rowlands' essay "The Structure of Evil," I conclude that the inability to retaliate is a key aspect of vulnerability -- engineered or otherwise.

Keywords: Vulnerability, Research populations, Prison experimentation