Off with their heads: the need to criminalize some forms of scientific misconduct.
Improvement in policy for the management of scientific misconduct has been slow. While assurance of due process at the ORI level is now in place, similar protections at the institutional level and institutional responsibility for further oversight and a workplace where the responsible conduct of research can be practiced have not yet been addressed. In contrast, policy regarding human subject protection has evolved rapidly to reflect firmer norms, with decisive priority given to subject protection over scientific or social needs. Perhaps because scientific misconduct policy has the potential to harm the careers of individual scientists and harms to individual subjects are thought to be indirect, the scientific community has been successful in blocking every move toward testing more rigorous regulation. The mantras that scientists can discipline their own, and the price of competitive science is some level of scientific misconduct are not persuasive. The standards by which science is judged should not be an exception to those governing others who deal with the public's money and have a duty to the public interest.
Redman
Barbara K
BK
Wayne State University, College of Nursing, USA.
Caplan
Arthur L
AL
D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000191:economics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence* / Q000592:standards; D003416:Criminal Law; D033161:Government Regulation; D006805:Human Experimentation / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000592:standards; D006801:Humans; D011640:Public Policy; D012109:Research Support as Topic / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D015871:Scientific Misconduct / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D012941:Social Responsibility; D014481:United States; D014492:United States Public Health Service