Sven Ove Hansson
Sci Eng Ethics
DOI 10.1007/s11948-016-9772-3
Abstract
Ethicists have investigated ethical problems in other disciplines, but there has not been much discussion of the ethics of their own activities. Research in ethics has many ethical problems in common with other areas of research, and it also has problems of its own. The researcher’s integrity is more precarious than in most other disciplines, and therefore even stronger procedural checks are needed to protect it. The promotion of some standpoints in ethical issues may be socially harmful, and even our decisions as to which issues we label as ‘‘ethical’’ may have unintended and potentially harmful social consequences. It can be argued that ethicists have an obligation to make positive contributions to society, but the practical implications of such an obligation are not easily identified. This article provides an overview of ethical issues that arise in research into ethics and in the application of such research. It ends with a list of ten practical proposals for how these issues should be dealt with.
The article is here.
Showing posts with label Integrity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Integrity. Show all posts
Thursday, April 14, 2016
Monday, February 15, 2016
If You’re Loyal to a Group, Does It Compromise Your Ethics?
By Francesca Gino
Harvard Business Review
Originally posted January 06, 2016
Here are two excerpts:
Most of us feel loyalty, whether to our clan, our comrades, an organization, or a cause. These loyalties are often important aspects of our social identity. Once a necessity for survival and propagation of the species, loyalty to one’s in-group is deeply rooted in human evolution.
But the incidents of wrongdoing that capture the headlines make it seem like loyalty is all too often a bad thing, corrupting many aspects of our personal and professional lives. My recent research, conducted in collaboration with Angus Hildreth of the University of California, Berkeley and Max Bazerman of Harvard Business School, suggests that this concern about loyalty is largely misplaced. In fact, we found loyalty to a group can increase, rather than decrease, honest behavior.
(cut)
As our research shows, loyalty can be a driver of good behavior, but when competition among groups is high, it can lead us to behave unethically. When we are part of a group of loyal members, traits associated with loyalty — such as honor, honesty, and integrity — are very salient in our minds. But when loyalty seems to demand a different type of goal, such as competing with other groups and winning at any cost, behaving ethically becomes a less important goal.
The article is here.
Harvard Business Review
Originally posted January 06, 2016
Here are two excerpts:
Most of us feel loyalty, whether to our clan, our comrades, an organization, or a cause. These loyalties are often important aspects of our social identity. Once a necessity for survival and propagation of the species, loyalty to one’s in-group is deeply rooted in human evolution.
But the incidents of wrongdoing that capture the headlines make it seem like loyalty is all too often a bad thing, corrupting many aspects of our personal and professional lives. My recent research, conducted in collaboration with Angus Hildreth of the University of California, Berkeley and Max Bazerman of Harvard Business School, suggests that this concern about loyalty is largely misplaced. In fact, we found loyalty to a group can increase, rather than decrease, honest behavior.
(cut)
As our research shows, loyalty can be a driver of good behavior, but when competition among groups is high, it can lead us to behave unethically. When we are part of a group of loyal members, traits associated with loyalty — such as honor, honesty, and integrity — are very salient in our minds. But when loyalty seems to demand a different type of goal, such as competing with other groups and winning at any cost, behaving ethically becomes a less important goal.
The article is here.
Friday, July 3, 2015
AMA is finally taking a stand on quacks like Dr. Oz
By Julia Belluz
Vox.com
Originally posted June 13, 2015
Medical students and residents frustrated with bogus advice from doctors on TV have, for more than a year, been asking the American Medical Association to clamp down and "defend the integrity of the profession."
Now the AMA is finally taking a stand on quack MDs who spread pseudoscience in the media.
"This is a turning point where the AMA is willing to go out in public and actively defend the profession," Benjamin Mazer, a medical student at the University of Rochester who was involved in crafting the resolution, said. "This is one of the most proactive steps that the AMA has taken [on mass media issues]."
The entire story is here.
Vox.com
Originally posted June 13, 2015
Medical students and residents frustrated with bogus advice from doctors on TV have, for more than a year, been asking the American Medical Association to clamp down and "defend the integrity of the profession."
Now the AMA is finally taking a stand on quack MDs who spread pseudoscience in the media.
"This is a turning point where the AMA is willing to go out in public and actively defend the profession," Benjamin Mazer, a medical student at the University of Rochester who was involved in crafting the resolution, said. "This is one of the most proactive steps that the AMA has taken [on mass media issues]."
The entire story is here.
Thursday, April 30, 2015
Guatemalans deliberately infected with STDs sue Johns Hopkins
By Oliver Laughland
The Guardian
Originally posted April 2, 2015
Nearly 800 plaintiffs have launched a billion-dollar lawsuit against Johns Hopkins University over its alleged role in the deliberate infection of hundreds of vulnerable Guatemalans with sexually transmitted diseases, including syphilis and gonorrhea, during a medical experiment programme in the 1940s and 1950s.
The lawsuit, which also names the philanthropic Rockefeller Foundation, alleges that both institutions helped “design, support, encourage and finance” the experiments by employing scientists and physicians involved in the tests, which were designed to ascertain if penicillin could prevent the diseases.
The entire article is here.
The Guardian
Originally posted April 2, 2015
Nearly 800 plaintiffs have launched a billion-dollar lawsuit against Johns Hopkins University over its alleged role in the deliberate infection of hundreds of vulnerable Guatemalans with sexually transmitted diseases, including syphilis and gonorrhea, during a medical experiment programme in the 1940s and 1950s.
The lawsuit, which also names the philanthropic Rockefeller Foundation, alleges that both institutions helped “design, support, encourage and finance” the experiments by employing scientists and physicians involved in the tests, which were designed to ascertain if penicillin could prevent the diseases.
The entire article is here.
Wednesday, April 15, 2015
Measuring the Return on Character
Harvard Business Review
April 2015
Here is an excerpt:
Character is a subjective trait that might seem to defy quantification. To measure it, KRW cofounder Fred Kiel and his colleagues began by sifting through the anthropologist Donald Brown’s classic inventory of about 500 behaviors and characteristics that are recognized and displayed in all human societies. Drawing on that list, they identified four moral principles—integrity, responsibility, forgiveness, and compassion—as universal. Then they sent anonymous surveys to employees at 84 U.S. companies and nonprofits, asking, among other things, how consistently their CEOs and management teams embodied the four principles. They also interviewed many of the executives and analyzed the organizations’ financial results. When financial data was unavailable, leaders’ results were excluded.
The entire article is here.
April 2015
Here is an excerpt:
Character is a subjective trait that might seem to defy quantification. To measure it, KRW cofounder Fred Kiel and his colleagues began by sifting through the anthropologist Donald Brown’s classic inventory of about 500 behaviors and characteristics that are recognized and displayed in all human societies. Drawing on that list, they identified four moral principles—integrity, responsibility, forgiveness, and compassion—as universal. Then they sent anonymous surveys to employees at 84 U.S. companies and nonprofits, asking, among other things, how consistently their CEOs and management teams embodied the four principles. They also interviewed many of the executives and analyzed the organizations’ financial results. When financial data was unavailable, leaders’ results were excluded.
The entire article is here.
Monday, March 16, 2015
Climate skeptic’s fossil fuel funding puts spotlight on journal conflict policies
By David Malakoff
Science Magazine
Originally published February 22, 2015
Here is an excerpt:
“We’re concerned about the lack of transparency in science… and a possible ethical breach in not disclosing potential conflicts of interest in an area with important public policy implications,” says Kert Davies, Executive Director of the CIC in Alexandria, Virginia. (Soon’s work, he notes, is routinely cited by politicians opposed to government action on climate, and widely disputed by mainstream climate researchers.)
Davies, a former Greenpeace staffer, helped spur the effort to use the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to obtain the documents that detail Soon’s funding sources. The law applies to the Smithsonian because it is a quasi-government entity (it operates the CfA in cooperation with the Harvard College Observatory). Greenpeace has been using such FOIA requests to document Soon’s sources of funding for years. Last week, Davies began providing recently-obtained documents to media outlets, including ScienceInsider, leading to stories in the New York Times, Nature, The Guardian, the Boston Globe, and Inside Climate News.
The entire article is here.
Science Magazine
Originally published February 22, 2015
Here is an excerpt:
“We’re concerned about the lack of transparency in science… and a possible ethical breach in not disclosing potential conflicts of interest in an area with important public policy implications,” says Kert Davies, Executive Director of the CIC in Alexandria, Virginia. (Soon’s work, he notes, is routinely cited by politicians opposed to government action on climate, and widely disputed by mainstream climate researchers.)
Davies, a former Greenpeace staffer, helped spur the effort to use the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to obtain the documents that detail Soon’s funding sources. The law applies to the Smithsonian because it is a quasi-government entity (it operates the CfA in cooperation with the Harvard College Observatory). Greenpeace has been using such FOIA requests to document Soon’s sources of funding for years. Last week, Davies began providing recently-obtained documents to media outlets, including ScienceInsider, leading to stories in the New York Times, Nature, The Guardian, the Boston Globe, and Inside Climate News.
The entire article is here.
Wednesday, October 1, 2014
Possible neurobiological basis for tradeoff between honesty, self-interest
By Ashley Wenners Herron
ScienceDirect
Originally published September 4, 2014
Summary:
What's the price on your integrity? Tell the truth; everyone has a tipping point. We all want to be honest, but at some point, we'll lie if the benefit is great enough. Now, scientists have confirmed the area of the brain in which we make that decision, using advanced imaging techniques to study how the brain makes choices about honesty.
(cut)
The study sheds light on the neuroscientific basis and broader nature of honesty. Moral philosophers and cognitive psychologists have had longstanding, contrasting hypotheses about the mechanisms governing the tradeoff between honesty and self-interest.
The "Grace" hypothesis, suggests that people are innately honest and have to control honest impulses if they want to profit. The "Will" hypothesis holds that self-interest is our automatic response.
The entire article is here.
ScienceDirect
Originally published September 4, 2014
Summary:
What's the price on your integrity? Tell the truth; everyone has a tipping point. We all want to be honest, but at some point, we'll lie if the benefit is great enough. Now, scientists have confirmed the area of the brain in which we make that decision, using advanced imaging techniques to study how the brain makes choices about honesty.
(cut)
The study sheds light on the neuroscientific basis and broader nature of honesty. Moral philosophers and cognitive psychologists have had longstanding, contrasting hypotheses about the mechanisms governing the tradeoff between honesty and self-interest.
The "Grace" hypothesis, suggests that people are innately honest and have to control honest impulses if they want to profit. The "Will" hypothesis holds that self-interest is our automatic response.
The entire article is here.
Monday, August 25, 2014
Moral Leadership Builds Employees, Company Culture And Bottom Line Results
By Micah Solomon
Forbes
Originally posted August 4, 2014
Here is an excerpt:
Moral leadership of employees involves, at a minimum:
• Involving them in the design of the work that will affect them
• Enhancing their pride in their work
• Enhancing their purpose, rather than using them only for their function
• Supporting their community and family involvement (however they define ‘‘family’’),
in good times and bad
• Supporting their involvement in areas of the company outside of their strict area of assignment
The article is here.
Forbes
Originally posted August 4, 2014
Here is an excerpt:
Moral leadership of employees involves, at a minimum:
• Involving them in the design of the work that will affect them
• Enhancing their pride in their work
• Enhancing their purpose, rather than using them only for their function
• Supporting their community and family involvement (however they define ‘‘family’’),
in good times and bad
• Supporting their involvement in areas of the company outside of their strict area of assignment
The article is here.
Friday, August 8, 2014
Five Key Ethical Issues
By Cynthia Schoeman
The Ethics Monitor
Published in HR Future
Here is an excerpt:
4. The new ROI: return on integrity
Embarking on a path of building an ethical culture is likely to give rise to some challenging questions, such as, ‘Does ethics matter?’ and, ‘Does ethics make good business sense?’. Leaders need to understand and champion the benefits of an ethical culture to ensure that its value is widely recognised.
The benefits include attracting and retaining top employees and board members; greater levels of trust amongst internal and external stakeholders; increased employee engagement and commitment; enhanced loyalty and support from customers and other stakeholders; improved investor and market confidence; and enhanced corporate reputation and brand equity. A strong ethical culture is also a sound defense against misconduct, which serves to reduce the risk of ethical failures and the associated costs and negative consequences.
The entire blog post is here.
The Ethics Monitor
Published in HR Future
Here is an excerpt:
4. The new ROI: return on integrity
Embarking on a path of building an ethical culture is likely to give rise to some challenging questions, such as, ‘Does ethics matter?’ and, ‘Does ethics make good business sense?’. Leaders need to understand and champion the benefits of an ethical culture to ensure that its value is widely recognised.
The benefits include attracting and retaining top employees and board members; greater levels of trust amongst internal and external stakeholders; increased employee engagement and commitment; enhanced loyalty and support from customers and other stakeholders; improved investor and market confidence; and enhanced corporate reputation and brand equity. A strong ethical culture is also a sound defense against misconduct, which serves to reduce the risk of ethical failures and the associated costs and negative consequences.
The entire blog post is here.
Friday, March 21, 2014
Five Key Ethical Issues in the Workplace
By Cynthia Schoeman
The Ethics Monitor
It’s important to understand these key ethical issues.
Ethics in the workplace is not a new topic. In theory, it should always have been applicable. However, in practice, ethics is often quite a recent focus area. Consequently, leaders and managers often don’t have the breadth of knowledge or depth of understanding about ethics that they have relative to many other areas of business. But, in order to manage ethics effectively, an understanding of five key ethical issues is imperative.
1. Ethics is a choice.
2. Values: The Leader's Role
3. Ethics involves Others as well
4. The New ROI: Return on Integrity
5. From Theory and Sound Intentions to Action
The entire article is here.
The Ethics Monitor
It’s important to understand these key ethical issues.
Ethics in the workplace is not a new topic. In theory, it should always have been applicable. However, in practice, ethics is often quite a recent focus area. Consequently, leaders and managers often don’t have the breadth of knowledge or depth of understanding about ethics that they have relative to many other areas of business. But, in order to manage ethics effectively, an understanding of five key ethical issues is imperative.
1. Ethics is a choice.
2. Values: The Leader's Role
3. Ethics involves Others as well
4. The New ROI: Return on Integrity
5. From Theory and Sound Intentions to Action
The entire article is here.
Sunday, February 9, 2014
Strengthening the Ethical Culture of Your Organization Should Be a Priority
By Barbara Richman
SPHR
According to the 2011 National Business Ethics Survey, a report published by the Ethics Resource Center, the ethical culture of the American workplace is in transition. The survey, the seventh since 1994, was conducted for the purpose of understanding how employees at all levels view ethics and compliance at work.
Its overall results send mixed signals to employers. While positive indicators are included in the findings, they are clouded by “ominous warning signs of a potentially significant ethics decline ahead.”
On the positive side, the data revealed historically low levels of misconduct in the American workplace and near record high levels of employees reporting misconduct that they observed. On the negative side, however, there was a sharp rise in retaliation against employee whistleblowers, an increase in the percentage of employees who perceived pressure to compromise standards in order to do their jobs, and near record levels of companies with weak ethical cultures.
The entire story is here.
SPHR
According to the 2011 National Business Ethics Survey, a report published by the Ethics Resource Center, the ethical culture of the American workplace is in transition. The survey, the seventh since 1994, was conducted for the purpose of understanding how employees at all levels view ethics and compliance at work.
Its overall results send mixed signals to employers. While positive indicators are included in the findings, they are clouded by “ominous warning signs of a potentially significant ethics decline ahead.”
On the positive side, the data revealed historically low levels of misconduct in the American workplace and near record high levels of employees reporting misconduct that they observed. On the negative side, however, there was a sharp rise in retaliation against employee whistleblowers, an increase in the percentage of employees who perceived pressure to compromise standards in order to do their jobs, and near record levels of companies with weak ethical cultures.
The entire story is here.
Saturday, November 2, 2013
Montreal Statement on Research Integrity in Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations
The Montreal Statement on Research Integrity in Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations was developed as part of the 3rd World Conference on Research Integrity, 5-8 May 2013, in Montréal, as a global guide to the responsible conduct of research. It is not a regulatory document and does not represent the official policies of the countries or organizations that funded or participated in the Conference.
Preamble.
Research collaborations that cross national, institutional, disciplinary and sector boundaries are important to the advancement of knowledge worldwide. Such collaborations present special challenges for the responsible conduct of research, because they may involve substantial differences in regulatory and legal systems, organizational and funding structures, research cultures, and approaches to training. It is critically important, therefore, that researchers be aware of and able to address such differences, as well as issues related to integrity that might arise in cross-boundary research collaborations. Researchers should adhere to the professional responsibilities set forth in the Singapore Statement on Research Integrity. In addition, the following responsibilities are particularly relevant to collaborating partners at the individual and institutional levels and fundamental to the integrity of collaborative research. Fostering the integrity of collaborative research is the responsibility of all individual and institutional partners.
The entire statement is here.
Preamble.
Research collaborations that cross national, institutional, disciplinary and sector boundaries are important to the advancement of knowledge worldwide. Such collaborations present special challenges for the responsible conduct of research, because they may involve substantial differences in regulatory and legal systems, organizational and funding structures, research cultures, and approaches to training. It is critically important, therefore, that researchers be aware of and able to address such differences, as well as issues related to integrity that might arise in cross-boundary research collaborations. Researchers should adhere to the professional responsibilities set forth in the Singapore Statement on Research Integrity. In addition, the following responsibilities are particularly relevant to collaborating partners at the individual and institutional levels and fundamental to the integrity of collaborative research. Fostering the integrity of collaborative research is the responsibility of all individual and institutional partners.
The entire statement is here.
Friday, April 19, 2013
Andrew Wakefield: autism inc
Andrew Wakefield's 'dishonest and irresponsible' research into the causes of autism led to his being struck off by the General Medical Council. That would have ended most doctors' careers. Instead, the MMR 'martyr' moved to the US – and into reality TV
By Alex Hannaford
The Guardian
Originally published April 5, 2013
For three days at the end of January, the Renaissance hotel in Washington DC fills up with television executives from around the world. The Realscreen Summit is where the makers of reality TV gather to discuss ideas, negotiate deals and discover the next Apprentice or I'm A Celebrity. Among the estimated 2,200 people who had paid up to $1,600 (£1,050) this year to try to snag face time with an exec from Freemantle, TLC, Discovery or National Geographic was an Englishman in his mid-50s wearing jeans, a crisp, white shirt and loafers, and carrying a MacBook. On his badge were the words "Autism Team".
This man's pitch was a reality TV series about autism, and he had a short trailer on his laptop: an autistic child screams; another bites his mother's hand; another repeatedly and violently slams a book against his head. Then a narrator tells us that "every day across the world, medical symptoms of hundreds of thousands of people with autism are being ignored". Cue piano music and the titles, The Autism Team: Changing Lives.
The premise is that the autism symptoms suffered by the children in the promo (Jon, 14, who is "wasting away"; six-year-old twins "still not potty trained"; and 15-year-old Jack, who is "non-verbal and very self-injurious") have left their parents feeling helpless and alone — until, that is, the Autism Team steps in to save the day.
The entire story is here.
By Alex Hannaford
The Guardian
Originally published April 5, 2013
For three days at the end of January, the Renaissance hotel in Washington DC fills up with television executives from around the world. The Realscreen Summit is where the makers of reality TV gather to discuss ideas, negotiate deals and discover the next Apprentice or I'm A Celebrity. Among the estimated 2,200 people who had paid up to $1,600 (£1,050) this year to try to snag face time with an exec from Freemantle, TLC, Discovery or National Geographic was an Englishman in his mid-50s wearing jeans, a crisp, white shirt and loafers, and carrying a MacBook. On his badge were the words "Autism Team".
This man's pitch was a reality TV series about autism, and he had a short trailer on his laptop: an autistic child screams; another bites his mother's hand; another repeatedly and violently slams a book against his head. Then a narrator tells us that "every day across the world, medical symptoms of hundreds of thousands of people with autism are being ignored". Cue piano music and the titles, The Autism Team: Changing Lives.
The premise is that the autism symptoms suffered by the children in the promo (Jon, 14, who is "wasting away"; six-year-old twins "still not potty trained"; and 15-year-old Jack, who is "non-verbal and very self-injurious") have left their parents feeling helpless and alone — until, that is, the Autism Team steps in to save the day.
The entire story is here.
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
The World's Most Ethical Companies
By Jacquelyn Smith
Forbes
Originally published March 1, 2013
The Ethisphere Institute, an international think tank, has just announced its seventh annual list of the World’s Most Ethical Companies. The selection, open to every company in every industry around the globe, gives its winners an opportunity to trumpet their do-gooding ways. It is not a ranking, so they are all equally winners.
(cut)
Why is there so much interest? Brigham says that recognition on the WME list has proven to be beneficial in various ways for the winners. “Many companies promote the recognition in their recruitment materials, as studies show that employees increasingly want to work for an organization that aligns with their own personal values. They are more loyal to such organizations,” he says. “In addition to providing a competitive advantage in workforce recruitment, many companies also display the designation in their marketing materials to attract customers, particularly in new markets, where the company may not be well-known.”
The World’s Most Ethical Companies are leaders of their respective industries when it comes to key ethical criteria such as tone from the top, employee well-being, CSR, compliance programs and other important areas, Brigham adds. “Every year we are impressed to learn some of the new ethics initiatives that these companies have developed and we are pleased to see the bar raised higher year after year. These companies also understand that a strong culture of ethics is also key to helping drive financial performance,” he concludes.
The entire article, including the winners, is here.
Forbes
Originally published March 1, 2013
The Ethisphere Institute, an international think tank, has just announced its seventh annual list of the World’s Most Ethical Companies. The selection, open to every company in every industry around the globe, gives its winners an opportunity to trumpet their do-gooding ways. It is not a ranking, so they are all equally winners.
(cut)
Why is there so much interest? Brigham says that recognition on the WME list has proven to be beneficial in various ways for the winners. “Many companies promote the recognition in their recruitment materials, as studies show that employees increasingly want to work for an organization that aligns with their own personal values. They are more loyal to such organizations,” he says. “In addition to providing a competitive advantage in workforce recruitment, many companies also display the designation in their marketing materials to attract customers, particularly in new markets, where the company may not be well-known.”
The World’s Most Ethical Companies are leaders of their respective industries when it comes to key ethical criteria such as tone from the top, employee well-being, CSR, compliance programs and other important areas, Brigham adds. “Every year we are impressed to learn some of the new ethics initiatives that these companies have developed and we are pleased to see the bar raised higher year after year. These companies also understand that a strong culture of ethics is also key to helping drive financial performance,” he concludes.
The entire article, including the winners, is here.
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
The Shredder Ate My Culture Report: Five Questions the Barclays Board Should Have Asked
By Donna Boehme
Corporate Compliance Insights
Originally published on February 13, 2013
It’s been a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad few weeks for Barclays. Despite tough talk last month by new CEO Antony Jenkins about “Five New Values” (inviting any of its 140,000 employees who don’t want to sign up to head for the exits), the bad news just keeps on coming for the embattled firm. And the latest round involves a shredder.
Last week’s headlines of “Shreddergate” and “Qatargate” spelled out the bank’s latest troubles. In the former, Andrew Tinney, the chief operating officer of the bank’s high-end investment division, commissioned a “workplace culture report” from an outside consultancy, but was so horrified by its contents that he shredded the report on the spot at his Surrey estate and then, according to media reports, “denied all knowledge of it ever having existed.” Neat trick, until an anonymous internal whistleblower emailed Jenkins a hint about the mysterious culture report. Add to this the latest revelations about a Qatari cash injection at the height of the financial crisis that may have been funded by the bank itself, which means the bank may have lied to UK regulators.
Mind you, this is after an annus horribilis in which Barclays was hit by a half a billion dollar fine for its part in manipulating LIBOR, lost its Chairman, CEO and COO in quick succession, and saw its credit rating lowered by Moody’s from “stable” to “negative.” The scandal ripples from that debacle continues, as the firm has just announced the exit of two more top execs: its finance chief and general counsel.
The entire article is here.
Corporate Compliance Insights
Originally published on February 13, 2013
It’s been a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad few weeks for Barclays. Despite tough talk last month by new CEO Antony Jenkins about “Five New Values” (inviting any of its 140,000 employees who don’t want to sign up to head for the exits), the bad news just keeps on coming for the embattled firm. And the latest round involves a shredder.
Last week’s headlines of “Shreddergate” and “Qatargate” spelled out the bank’s latest troubles. In the former, Andrew Tinney, the chief operating officer of the bank’s high-end investment division, commissioned a “workplace culture report” from an outside consultancy, but was so horrified by its contents that he shredded the report on the spot at his Surrey estate and then, according to media reports, “denied all knowledge of it ever having existed.” Neat trick, until an anonymous internal whistleblower emailed Jenkins a hint about the mysterious culture report. Add to this the latest revelations about a Qatari cash injection at the height of the financial crisis that may have been funded by the bank itself, which means the bank may have lied to UK regulators.
Mind you, this is after an annus horribilis in which Barclays was hit by a half a billion dollar fine for its part in manipulating LIBOR, lost its Chairman, CEO and COO in quick succession, and saw its credit rating lowered by Moody’s from “stable” to “negative.” The scandal ripples from that debacle continues, as the firm has just announced the exit of two more top execs: its finance chief and general counsel.
The entire article is here.
Thursday, November 29, 2012
The Role of Health Professionals in Detainee Interrogation
A teenager tortured at Guantanamo, and the stalled legislation to ensure clinicians "first, do no harm"
By Santiago Wills
The Atlantic
Originally published November 11, 2012
Here is one excerpt:
In the aftermath of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, ever since leaked reports and testimonies -- including that of alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, currently on trial in Guantanamo -- were published in 2004, the issue has attracted the attention of the media, health organizations, and political activists. Psychologists and doctors have clashed with their peers and with the Department of Defense over the role that health professionals should play in interrogations, given their oath to "do no harm." The Senate Judiciary Committee and numerous military investigations have confirmed that physicians and clinicians played a significant role during so-called enhanced interrogations, either through reverse engineering of the Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape (SERE) program, or through monitoring and assisting in CIA black sites and prisons like Bagram and Guantanamo.
Recently, that conflict reached politicians in Albany, New York. This year, State Senator Thomas Duane and Assembly Member Richard Gottfried sponsored a unique piece of legislation that establishes sanctions (including license removal) for state-licensed health professionals who participate in torture or improper treatment of prisoners.
"The bill presents an opportunity to fill a gap in state law on the regulation of health professionals that desperately needs to be filled," Leonard Rubenstein, the former president of Physicians for Human Rights -- an independent organization that fights human rights violations all around the world -- said in a public forum. "Almost everyone agrees that the idea that health professionals can participate in abuse of detainees and prisoners is indefensible. If that is the case, it is also indefensible to exclude such acts from state law on licensing and regulation of health professionals."
The entire story is here.
Friday, November 9, 2012
DSM-5 Field Trials Discredit the American Psychiatric Association
By Allen Frances, M.D.
The Huffington Post
Originally posted October 31, 2012
The $3 million DSM-5 Field Trials have been a pure disaster from start to finish. First, there was the poor choice of design. The study restricted itself to reliability -- the measurement of diagnostic agreement among different raters. Unaccountably, it failed to address two much more crucial questions -- DSM-5's potential impact on who would be diagnosed and on how much its dramatic lowering of diagnostic thresholds would increase the rates of mental disorder in the general population. There was no possible excuse for not asking these simple-to-answer and vitally important questions. We have a right to know how much DSM-5 will contribute to the already rampant diagnostic inflation in psychiatry, especially since this risks even greater overuse of psychotropic drugs.
The entire story is here.
The Huffington Post
Originally posted October 31, 2012
The $3 million DSM-5 Field Trials have been a pure disaster from start to finish. First, there was the poor choice of design. The study restricted itself to reliability -- the measurement of diagnostic agreement among different raters. Unaccountably, it failed to address two much more crucial questions -- DSM-5's potential impact on who would be diagnosed and on how much its dramatic lowering of diagnostic thresholds would increase the rates of mental disorder in the general population. There was no possible excuse for not asking these simple-to-answer and vitally important questions. We have a right to know how much DSM-5 will contribute to the already rampant diagnostic inflation in psychiatry, especially since this risks even greater overuse of psychotropic drugs.
The entire story is here.
Monday, October 29, 2012
D'Souza Resigns From King's College
Inside Higher Ed
Originally published October 19, 2012
Dinesh D'Souza, president of the King's College, a Christian college in New York City, has resigned after reports that he shared a hotel room with a woman to whom he was not married before filing for divorce from his wife. In a statement posted on the college's website Thursday, the president of the Board of Trustees said that D'Souza had resigned, effective immediately, to "allow him to attend to his personal and family needs."
The entire story is here.
Originally published October 19, 2012
Dinesh D'Souza, president of the King's College, a Christian college in New York City, has resigned after reports that he shared a hotel room with a woman to whom he was not married before filing for divorce from his wife. In a statement posted on the college's website Thursday, the president of the Board of Trustees said that D'Souza had resigned, effective immediately, to "allow him to attend to his personal and family needs."
The entire story is here.
Saturday, September 15, 2012
Dishonorable Conduct?
By Allie Grasgreen
Inside Higher Ed
Originally published September 6, 2012
Officials at Harvard University were quick to condemn the behavior of the 125 students suspected of collaborating inappropriately on a take-home exam.
“These allegations, if proven, represent totally unacceptable behavior that betrays the trust upon which intellectual inquiry at Harvard depends,” Harvard President Drew Faust said in a statement.
Harvard officials, who declined to comment for this story, say they plan to revisit their academic integrity policies and possibly create an honor code. It’s not the first time they’ve raised the idea – for at least two years now, administrators have recognized the potential need for a makeover. In 2010, undergraduate dean Jay Harris told The Harvard Crimson that academic dishonesty there was “a real problem.”
Harvard's official handbook says students should “assume that collaboration in the completion of assignments is prohibited unless explicitly permitted by the instructor.” And the university apparently created a voluntary academic integrity pledge students could sign last year, the Globe reported, but scrapped it this year.
The entire story is here.
Inside Higher Ed
Originally published September 6, 2012
Officials at Harvard University were quick to condemn the behavior of the 125 students suspected of collaborating inappropriately on a take-home exam.
“These allegations, if proven, represent totally unacceptable behavior that betrays the trust upon which intellectual inquiry at Harvard depends,” Harvard President Drew Faust said in a statement.
Harvard officials, who declined to comment for this story, say they plan to revisit their academic integrity policies and possibly create an honor code. It’s not the first time they’ve raised the idea – for at least two years now, administrators have recognized the potential need for a makeover. In 2010, undergraduate dean Jay Harris told The Harvard Crimson that academic dishonesty there was “a real problem.”
Harvard's official handbook says students should “assume that collaboration in the completion of assignments is prohibited unless explicitly permitted by the instructor.” And the university apparently created a voluntary academic integrity pledge students could sign last year, the Globe reported, but scrapped it this year.
The entire story is here.
Monday, January 16, 2012
British science needs 'integrity overhaul’
Medical Academics Voice Concern Over Research Misconduct
By Daniel Cressey
Nature
British scientists are fundamentally failing to deal with research misconduct, which is widespread in the country, leading experts have warned.
At a conference in London yesterday, participants were united in calling for more action on the issue.
“There is a recognition that we have a problem,” said Fiona Godlee, editor-in-chief of the British Medical Journal (BMJ) and one of the driving forces behind the meeting.
Coinciding with the meeting, a BMJ survey of 2,782 doctors and medical academics showed that 13% claimed to have firsthand knowledge of “inappropriately adjusting, excluding, altering or fabricating data”. Six per cent said that they were aware of cases of possible research misconduct at their institutions that they thought had not been properly investigated.
Research-integrity issues in the United Kingdom have long been fretted over. Last year the House of Commons science and technology select committee said that they found “the general oversight of research integrity in the UK to be unsatisfactory”. Similar concerns have been raised by others, going back more than a decade.
Elizabeth Wager, chairwoman of the international Committee on Publication Ethics, warned the meeting that one US editor had told her that UK institutions are the worst to deal with in cases of suspected misconduct. “Our reputation in the world is not looking good,” she said.
She added that although the concern is being driven mainly by medical researchers, their worries apply to other scientific fields.
UK mechanisms for ensuring ethical conduct in research “need to be strengthened”, concluded a communiqué from the meeting. In addition, the meeting said, the UK Research Integrity Office (UKRIO) should be enhanced, and ongoing funding for it should be secured. (At one point last year, the future financing of UKRIO was unclear, although it now seems to be secure.)
The entire sotry can be found here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)