A code of ethics for the life sciences

被引:0
作者
Nancy L. Jones
机构
[1] Medical Center Boulevard,Wake Forest University School of Medicine
[2] National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases,Strategic Planning and Evaluation Branch (SPEB), Office of Strategic Planning and Financial Management (OSPFM)
[3] NIH,undefined
[4] DHHS,undefined
来源
Science and Engineering Ethics | 2007年 / 13卷
关键词
Professionalism; Ethics; Code; Research integrity; Life sciences; Norms; Social contract;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The activities of the life sciences are essential to provide solutions for the future, for both individuals and society. Society has demanded growing accountability from the scientific community as implications of life science research rise in influence and there are concerns about the credibility, integrity and motives of science. While the scientific community has responded to concerns about its integrity in part by initiating training in research integrity and the responsible conduct of research, this approach is minimal. The scientific community justifies itself by appealing to the ethos of science, claiming academic freedom, self-direction, and self-regulation, but no comprehensive codification of this foundational ethos has been forthcoming. A review of the professional norms of science and a prototype code of ethics for the life sciences provide a framework to spur discussions within the scientific community to define scientific professionalism. A formalization of implicit principles can provide guidance for recognizing divergence from the norms, place these norms within a context that would enhance education of trainees, and provide a framework for discussing externally and internally applied pressures that are influencing the practice of science. The prototype code articulates the goal for life sciences research and the responsibilities associated with the freedom of exploration, the principles for the practice of science, and the virtues of the scientists themselves. The time is ripe for scientific communities to reinvigorate professionalism and define the basis of their social contract. Codifying the basis of the social contract between science and society will sustain public trust in the scientific enterprise.
引用
收藏
页码:25 / 43
页数:18
相关论文
共 23 条
[1]  
Anderson M. S.(1994)The graduate student experience and subscription to the norms of science Research in Higher Education 35 273-299
[2]  
Louis K. S.(2000)Normative orientations of university faculty and doctoral students Science and Engineering Ethics 6 443-461
[3]  
Anderson M. S.(2001)Trust us to make a difference: Ensuring public confidence in the integrity of clinical research Academic Medicine 76 209-214
[4]  
Cohen J. J.(1977)The code of the scientist and its relationship to ethics Science 198 699-705
[5]  
Cournand A.(1994)Ethics in research: Current issues for dental researchers and their professional society Journal of Dental Research 73 1759-1765
[6]  
Frankel M. S.(2000)Scientific societies as sentinels of responsible research conduct Proceedings Society of Experimental Biology and Medicine 224 216-219
[7]  
Frankel M. S.(2003)The role of scientific societies in promoting research integrity Science and Engineering Ethics 9 139-140
[8]  
Frankel M. S.(2000)Ethical values in the education of biomedical researchers Hastings Center Report 30 S40-S44
[9]  
Bird S. J.(1998)Evaluation of the research norms of scientists and administrators responsible for academic research integrity Journal of American Medical Association 279 41-47
[10]  
Heitman E.(1993)Academic dishonesty: Honor codes and other contextual influences Journal of Higher Education 64 522-538