Remember to try as many alternatives as you can within each case study presented in this course.
Click this link |
O N L I N E R E S E A R C H E T H I C S C O U R S E Section Three: Institutional Responsibility CASE STUDY: Expensive Lesson In consultation with appropriate institutional officers, Dr. Adelman was able to retrieve documents that suggested credible evidence for possible misconduct. This choice is ethically permitted and is strongly encouraged. At the time that the inquiry phase begins, all relevant documents should be sequestered to look for credible evidence and to protect the respondent against charges of data tampering.
The outcome of the real case is that Dr. Phinney was compelled to go public with her accusation and was not protected against retaliation. In 1993, the Washtenaw County Circuit Court found that Dr. Adelman violated the Whistleblower's Protection Act and Dr. Perlmutter committed fraud. The court ordered the University of Michigan to pay Dr. Phinney $1.1 million in damages. That verdict was upheld by the Michigan Court of Appeals, which added an additional $250,000 interest due.
END OF THIS CASE. To try a different alternative, click this link.
|