Back to top

CAUT Bulletin Archives
1996-2016

December 1997

Ethics code restrictions limit intellectual freedom

I was glad to see the article (Bulletin, October) opposing the wilder excesses of the proposed Tri-Council Code of Ethics. However, the concern about extending protection to collectivities is somewhat of a red herring. The article itself says: "For example, it is hard to understand why any citizen in Canada would be able to write an unofficial biography of a living person except, of course, university professors ...." It is indeed difficult to see why university professors should be so restricted. But a "living person" is not a collectivity; a compromise allowing private individuals, but not collectivities, to veto research that they felt harmed them, would still prevent academics from writing unauthorized biographies.

It is not enough, as the article seems in places to suggest, that there should be an open season on governments and corporations, or even on most collectivities, but heavy restrictions on research involving individuals, aboriginal peoples, or "vulnerable minorities." The restrictions that have been suggested are repugnant to intellectual freedom, whichever individuals or groups are placed out of bounds.

Let me suggest an important distinction that should be made in whatever code is finally adopted. In medical research, and in a few other areas, subjects may be harmed, physically, by the process of research and this must obviously be controlled carefully. A collectivity should also be protected against such damage -- for instance, a researcher cannot ethically cause discord within a community to observe the response!

On the other hand, there has never been a tradition in medical or other research that anybody, e.g. a drug company whose product has been found dangerous, has a right to protection from the results of research. Let us recognize this difference. Subjects -- singular or plural, aboriginal or not -- have the right to be protected from fraudulent or invasive research. Nobody has a right to censor the knowledge that might result.

Robert Dawson
Mathematics & Computing Science, Saint Mary's University