The idea was not his, nor the work nor the science behind it, but the cells were. That has to count for something. Rebecca Skloot realizes this in a glimmer of light at the age of sixteen, and in that moment, Rebecca's life is no longer hers. And it is for this reason that the limits of science and ethics are no longer separate questions. Rebecca Skloot thinks that counts for something. People do bad things that have bad results and get away with it. And people do bad things that have good results and get away with it. Rebecca Skloot's nonfiction novel, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, questions the morals behind decisions that can benefit the human population. Does this make the theft acceptable because the theft of this particular thing (Henrietta's cells) "helped develop drugs to treat herpes, leukemia, influenza, hemophilia and Parkinson” (Skloot 10)? Rebecca Skloot focuses on emotional appeals; she not only wants to question the ethics of science, but also highlights what those in high positions are capable of getting away with. Skloot embarks on a passionate journey criticizing the ethics of scientists, the injustice done to the Lacks, and the family ties that run deeper than connective tissues and cancer cells. Skloot immerses itself in cells, dynamics, family and surfaces with the reader, on the other side, transformed. Rebecca Skloot challenges the ordinary by presenting Henrietta's story. Chronology plays an important role in the unfolding of this piece of nonfiction. Rebecca first takes the reader through Henrietta's diagnosis before bringing them back to the beginning of Henrietta Lacks' life. The reality and bluntness of this chapter is what draws the reader in. The brevity of the chapter and...... middle of paper...... ok. Skloot doesn't just educate her readers, because if she did, all the additional details and descriptions would be unnecessary. Skloot seeks to unite on an emotional level with human connection. This is not a book that a reader can dip a toe into. The reader has a choice: fully appreciate the book and immerse themselves in it, or look at it from a different perspective. detached and more logical point of view, focusing only on the facts. This is not what Skloot wanted. Skloot wrote this book to tell not only the story of Henrietta's stolen cells, but also the story of Henrietta and her family, and the effects of her death on them. Skloot brings the reader to the forefront of this period when medical rights were just beginning and unethical behavior was socially accepted. The reader gets the chance to see what a lack of personal morals and code of ethics can really be in the medical field..