Incarceration, Restitution, and Lifetime Debarment: Legal Consequences of Scientific Misconduct in the Eric Poehlman Case: Commentary on: “Scientific Forensics: How the Office of Research Integrity can Assist Institutional Investigations of Research Misconduct During Oversight Review”

Science and Engineering Ethics 16 (4):737-741 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Following its determination of a finding of scientific misconduct the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) will seek redress for any injury sustained. Several remedies both administrative and statutory may be available depending on the strength of the evidentiary findings of the misconduct investigation. Pursuant to federal regulations administrative remedies are primarily remedial in nature and designed to protect the integrity of the affected research program, whereas statutory remedies including civil fines and criminal penalties are designed to deter and punish wrongdoers. This commentary discusses the available administrative and statutory remedies in the context of a specific case, that of former University of Vermont nutrition researcher Eric Poehlman, and supplies a possible rationale for the legal result

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,221

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Scientific misconduct: Present problems and future trends.Barbara Mishkin - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):283-292.
The legacy of the Hwang case: Research misconduct in biosciences.Péter Kakuk - 2009 - Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (4):545-562.
Responsible conduct in research.P. J. D. Drenth - 2006 - Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (1):13-21.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-11-18

Downloads
51 (#276,257)

6 months
2 (#658,848)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?