Ethics Cases, How Disappointing to Read.

I investigated the case of Smart, Eric J.

https://ori.hhs.gov/index.php/case-summary-smart-eric-j

The background of the case is that Eric J. Smart at the University of Kentucky “engaged in research misconduct by falsifying and/or fabricating data that were included in ten (10) published papers, one (1) submitted manuscript, seven (7) grant applications, and three (3) progress reports over a period of ten (10) years. Respondent reported experimental data for knockout mice that did not exist in five (5) grant applications and three (3) progress reports and also falsified and/or fabricated images in 45 figures”.

In response Dr. Smart has agreed to a voluntary exclusion agreement for the period of seven years starting in October 2012. In other words, he is admitting to wrong doing and is facing negotiated consequences. The details of the agreement can be read about on the site, but in summary he has agreed to withdraw from receiving any public funding for work, has removed himself from any leadership positions within the professional community, and is retracting much of his work that has already been published fraudulently.

After briefly reading through a few other ethics cases I have learned that this one involving Dr. Smart at the University of Kentucky isn’t unique, which is quite a shocking discovery for me. I had always assumed that researchers would be more compelled by persevering their character, morality and ethical inquiry than by professional ambition or reputation. I guess that reveals my naivety. Furthermore, after reading the case, I assumed that because Dr. Smart’s work involved health research, he would be much more inclined to be honest. Seems that I assumed wrong.

This all reminds me of the importance of creating a work environment that make it difficult or impossible to misbehave (commit fraud in this case) in. For example, I learned in my college accounting class the importance of putting in place good “controls” that make it very difficult for anyone in an organization from mishandling money. These controls aren’t intended to create a work environment where everyone is suspicious of each other, rather it is to watch out and care for each other. No one is perfectly immune poor decision making and in some circumstances even the best people can tempted above that which they are able to resist. You never know the pressure on a persons life that might make him or her do something stupid. It seems that Dr. Smart has done many good things in his professional life to land him a top spot at a great university, but it also seems that he wasn’t provided the necessary controls and oversight to help him make the right decisions every time. Its a lesson to me to place these controls for myself and for the people that I am responsible for caring about.