Judging the Medics' Science: Misconduct and Research Culture in Disciplinary Proceedings since 1990

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

What does 'bad science' mean? In the UK and abroad, science investigators and medical doctors are increasingly subject to close scrutiny. But what happens when these are the same people: what does 'bad science' mean for medical doctors who pursue scientific research, and at the same time wear a professional hat as carers for patients under a public health system? In a 2011 report the Science and Technology Committee of the House of Commons has characterised the governance of scientific conduct as 'unsatisfactory.' On the international scene, many organisations and committees are increasingly working to prevent and respond to research misconduct and fraud. This study will be designed to inform current policy debates on this issue of great public concern.This project will help to democratize science, by enhancing public understandings of trust, professionalism, integrity but also misconduct, in science. It also seeks to broaden the terms of the debates on scientific research. It does so by examining the role of the General Medical Council (and closely related decision-making bodies) in securing legitimate research conduct in the area of UK medicine. The project will span two decades, ranging from the 'first' widely publicised science fraud case in the UK, a case of paper fabrication and improper authorship attribution involving obstetrician Malcolm Pearce, up until the saga of Andrew Wakefield's research on the link between MMR vaccines and autism, and other current developments. The aims of the project include: 1. to offer the first comprehensive analysis of General Medical Council's decisions about scientific misconduct in medical research, for the period 1990-2010, and 2. more broadly speaking, to understand what constitutes misconduct, ethics, and integrity in medical science in their cultural contexts.Through close reading, legal analysis and critique of the different cases, in this project I will thus explore the cultural aspects of scientific conduct and misconduct. These cultural aspects include the recent breakdown of trust in the medical profession's autonomy, and public expectations of transparency in science.The project will provide 'thinking tools' to engage the public as well as practitioners and other stakeholders about issues of scientific conduct and misconduct. It will also enable the identification of good and bad practices in the area of research governance, and inform policy reforms to better tackle the problems of scientific misconduct.