Ethics in Physics Research

The assignment is found at.

http://www.physics.uc.edu/~johnson/ethics/final_paper.pdf
It might be helpful to read if you care to understand what is going on.

The situation is as follows; at a lab there is a discrepancy between the hazardous waste disposed and the waste picked up. If people are notified, the student who noticed will not be able to receive a paycheck or finish his doctorate research until the long clean up and investigation is completed. What is the student to do?

When analyzing an ethical situation, one must always determine who is a stakeholder. In this situation, the stakeholders are the student, the professor, and the local population in general.

The student is in a position of making a decision. He has very much at stake here because he is relying on the current situation to remain relatively unchanged so he can have a job and finish his research project. Furthermore, this is the research that will get him a PhD that will thrust him into the work world. His very future rides on finishing this project. However, he is the one with the ability to make a decision. He is the only one who has noticed the discrepancy and the decision to report or not is his. He has much to lose by reporting, and if he doesn’t report, the results could vary. The problem could turn out to be harmless or nonexistent, or it could turn out to be a bad spill that could shut the plant down. The student is in the position of making the decision, but it is a difficult one from his point of view.

The professor is in a position of responsibility. While he doesn’t know about the problem, his lab and his money are at stake. If the problem is reported, his lab will be shut down while an investigation is carried out at his expense. If the problem is not reported, he faces heavy fines and his lab being shut down forever. If the problem is reported later, he will face his lab being shut down while and an investigation on his bill. It is very important to note that the difference between the problem being reported now as opposed to later is the possible situation where the discrepancy is due to a spill, it is noticed by the authorities, and is hazardous. Since none of those are definitely going to happen, the decision of the student is less automatic and more ethical. If an investigation turns up a hazardous spill, the lab could be closed indefinitely as special teams clean up the mess.

The general population also has a stake in this situation. If the discrepancy is due to a spill of hazardous materials then they are put at risk. While they have no direct interest in the spill, the general population could be put in harms way from the pollution of this waste. They may also have to end up cleaning some of the spill.

If I were the student, I would most likely tell the professor. I think it would be deceitful and disrespectful to not tell the owner of the lab that has the problem in it. As my advisor throughout the PhD research process, I feel that I would owe it to him to notify him of everything that his grant money is going towards. I would tell him that I found a discrepancy in the hazardous waste tank. I would then tell him that I calculated the amount, and I did not think that there was any danger whatsoever so there was no danger in leaving the lab open until the current research projects could be finished. I would leave the decision up to him because it is his lab and I wouldn’t feel ethical making the decision for him. However, I do feel it is still ethical to suggest a course of action to him.

I feel that the fairest way to make the decision is coming from a person in the position of the student, i.e. depending on this lab staying open to finish graduate school, but with the responsibilities of the professor because it is ultimately his responsibility whether he knows about it or not. This melding of two people into one hypothetical person would be impossible in reality, but it is the only way in this hypothetical situation to fairly assess all human angles and make a full ethical decision. This is because the student would potentially be making a decision to let the professor make the decision or not let the professor make the decision. I have already stated what I would do in this situation and why, but my answer seemed to go against the spirit of the exercise so I will re-arrange the question slightly. In this situation, I would finish the research as quickly as possible and then report it. If I believed that the material was not harming anyone, I would be willing to expose myself to it, and since it is not hurting anyone I feel it is not unethical to delay in fixing the problem.

It sounds slightly selfish to say that as the student I would allow my own research to have priority over a hazardous spill, but I do tend to balance my needs with those of others. I do believe that finishing my research and moving on with the rest of my life is incredibly important; important enough to continue doing it while leaking a bit more waste into the environment. I feel that the waste IS doing some damage, but that damage must be weighed against the other interests. In this case, the other interests are that my life as a student would be set back very far, and in the intermediate period I would be left in limbo. This would be a large amount of damage to the plans in my life.

I have made my decision on whether or not to report the leak by weighing the damage done by the leak if it exists against the damage to the students and his plans. This damage to plans, if it is not physically hurting the student is it true damage? I have to conclude that it is true damage because it takes from the student the time he has already put into reaching the current level (post-graduate physics) and makes it less valuable. It also does some emotional damage as the expectations and plans are dashed. This is my reasoning for whether or not the student is damaged and the extent and weight of the damage that would be done to him. This damage is of a greater magnitude than the damage done to everyone by the possible leak not being investigated for a few more weeks. On this basis I make my decision to continue the research and not report the leak.

Where do I come up with the basis for making these decisions? I believe in moral absolutes from religion, and most of my ethical decisions come from this foundation. I believe in good stewardship of a person’s job and of our planet. However, I also believe strongly in the value of each human. I believe each human has potential to be great in his or her own way. I also believe in the beauty of science, and that with every new discovery that allows us to better understand the universe, we are better understanding God’s handiwork and when we wonder at its intricacies we give him praise. When given the choice between fulfilling one human’s potential and pushing forward the boundaries of science or lessening the degree of damage possibly done to the earth, the choice becomes clear and easy in this light.

In conclusion, I decided that the only ethical course of action for the student to take would be to inform the professor of the possible leak in his tank. Beyond that, he would be on solid moral standing to suggest a course of action to the professor. As a whole, the student-professor team could report the discrepancy to the proper authorities, but the best course of action would be to speed up the research and once it was finished to report the issue. It is most ethical to do this because if one weighs the damages done by each scenario, the student has more to lose if the lab is closed immediately than everyone else combined were it to remain open. He does suffer damages even if it is not physical because he would not end up completing his well-laid plans nor fulfilling his potential. I believe that these are the best decisions to make based on the circumstances judged by my own ethical code.