Should life scientists make an oath analogous to the Hippocratic oath that newly minted physicians make in the belief that they will "do no harm" once they utter the hallowed words? The goal of a Hippocratic oath for life scientists would be to instill a sense of professionalism and responsibility so that they will not engage in potentially harmful activities. A number of advocates have supported the establishment of an oath for life scientists as a way to address concerns about potential future bioterrorists...
A Hippocratic oath for life scientists would be nice window dressing, but it would simply be that. The more important method to ensure that graduating life scientists are ethical and responsible citizens is the oversight provided by their laboratory supervisors, mentors, and/or thesis advisers. These individuals have an important role in watching their students' behavior over the years. Those who show irresponsible behavior and a diminished capacity for self-improvement should not be allowed to graduate (as should be the case in medical school). Graduate schools (and medical schools) should develop policies and procedures for problem students. Behavioral infractions should be carefully documented and should be just as important in the evaluation of a student's academic future as the traditional graduation requirements.
From a terribly confused piece in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. The author plainly does not know what the Hippocratic Oath actually says [which does not include "do no harm"], or its (properly) limited role in medical education and licensing. Nonetheless, she does get one thing (almost) right: "the medical profession [like virtually all professions] does not have a good track record in policing itself." She provides little reason for believing that life scientists are likely to do better, or that the steps she endorses relate adequately to her "do no harm" thesis.
No comments:
Post a Comment