A Hippocratic Oath For Life Scientists?

In an age of bioterrorism, and of less immoral but still troubling forms of research, should life scientists take their own Hippocratic oath, vowing as doctors do to do no harm? Laura Kahn poses that question in this month’s Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, but notes that the oath hasn’t done much for medical professionals: […]

Caduceus
In an age of bioterrorism, and of less immoral but still troubling forms of research, should life scientists take their own Hippocratic oath, vowing as doctors do to do no harm?

Laura Kahn poses that question in this month’s Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, but notes that the oath hasn’t done much for medical professionals:

But has the Hippocratic oath instilled a sense of responsibility in all physicians? Are they all exemplary in their conduct, ethics, and professionalism? Of course not. There have been many highly publicized, and not so publicized cases, of “bad apple” physicians. While the vast majority of physicians are highly ethical and responsible, some are not. Unfortunately, the medical profession does not have a good track record in policing itself.

A similar oath for life scientists, says Kahn, would be so much “window dressing,” distracting from the difficult but necessary work of training scientists to act responsibly and withholding credentials from those who misbehave.

The more important method to ensure that graduating life scientists are ethical and responsible citizens is the oversight provided by their laboratory supervisors, mentors, and/or thesis advisers. These individuals have an important role in watching their students’ behavior over the years. Those who show irresponsible behavior and a diminished capacity for self-improvement should not be allowed to graduate (as should be the case in medical school).

On the one hand, anything that encourages scientists to think of the impact of their work on the world is laudable. On the other, there’s something worrisome about barring from the profession “those who show irresponsible behavior and a diminished capacity for self-improvement.” Who makes that judgment? Might our definitions of responsibility and self-improvement someday be turned on their head, with students punished for reservations about, for instance, biodefense research in the service of the state, or market-dictated genetic engineering?

What do you think?

Establishing a code of conduct in the life sciences [The Bulletin Online]

Image: Stuart Yeates