To Tell or Not to Tell? the Ethical Dilemma of the Would-Be Whistleblower

This article was downloaded by: [ ] On: 03 November 2011, At: 06:11 Publisher: Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Accountability in Research
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gacr20

To Tell or Not to Tell? The Ethical Dilemma of the Would-Be Whistleblower
Janet Malek Ph.D. a a

Department of Medical Humanities, Brody School of Medicine, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina, USA Available online: 11 May 2010

To cite this article: Janet Malek Ph.D. (2010): To Tell or Not to Tell? The Ethical Dilemma of the Would-Be Whistleblower, Accountability in Research, 17:3, 115-129 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08989621003791929

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Accountability in Research, 17:115–129, 2010 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0898-9621 print / 1545-5815 online DOI: 10.1080/08989621003791929

To Tell or Not to Tell? The Ethical Dilemma of the Would-Be Whistleblower

References: Brody, B. (1988). Life and Death Decision Making. New York: Oxford University Press. CHPS Consulting. (2000). Analysis of institutional policies for responding to allegations of scientific misconduct. Report prepared for the Office of Research Integrity. Available at http://ori.dhhs.gov/documents/institutional_policies.pdf. Last accessed April 13, 2010. Downloaded by [ ] at 06:11 03 November 2011 Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. (2009). On Being a Scientist. Third ed. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. Corvino, J. (2002). Loyalty in business? Journal of Business Ethics, 41:179–185. Couzin, J. (2006). Truth and consequences. Science, 313:1222–1226. Davis, M. (1995). Science: After such knowledge, what responsibility? Professional Ethics 4:49–74. Davis, M. (1996). Some paradoxes of whistleblowing. Business and Professional Ethics Journal, 15:3–19. DeGeorge, R. T. (2006). Business Ethics. Sixth Edition. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall. Department of Health and Human Services. (2005). 42 CFR Parts 50 and 93. Public Health Service Policies on Research Misconduct; Final Rule. Available at http:// ori.dhhs.gov/documents/42_cfr_parts_50_and_93_2005.pdf. Last accessed February 22, 2010. Gunsalus, C. K. (1998). How to blow the whistle and still have a career afterwards. Science and Engineering Ethics, 4:51–64. IEEE Board of Directors. (2006). IEEE Code of Ethics. Available at http://www.ieee.org/ portal/pages/iportals/aboutus/ethics/code.html. Last accessed February 22, 2010. Jubb, P. B. (1999). Whistleblowing: A restrictive definition and interpretation. Journal of Business Ethics, 21:77–94. Kuhar, M. (2008). On blacklisting in science. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14:301–303. Lubalin, J., Ardinid, M. E., and Matheson J. L. (1995). Consequences of whistleblowing for the whistleblower in misconduct in science cases. Report prepared for the Office of Research Integrity by the Research Triangle Institute. Available at http:// ori.dhhs.gov/documents/consequences.pdf. Last accessed April 13, 2010. Malek, J. (2007). Moral judgment and the ideal intuitor: Dealing with moral confusion and moral disagreement. In Cherry, M. and Iltis, A. (eds.) Pluralistic Casuistry. Dordrecht: Springer. Near, J. P. and Miceli, M. P. (1995). Effective whistle-blowing. The Academy of Management Review, 20:679–708. Loyalty. (2010). In Oxford English Dictionary Online. Available at http://dictionary. oed.com/cgi/entry/50136271?single=1&query_type=word&queryword=Loyalty& first=1&max_to_show=10. Last accessed April 13, 2010. The Ethical Dilemma of the Would-Be Whistleblower Loyal. (2004). In Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate(R) Dictionary. Available at http:// www.credoreference.com/entry/mwcollegiate/loyal_loi_l. Last accessed April 13, 2010. Titus, S. L., Wells, J. A., and Rhoades, L. J. (2008). Repairing research integrity. Nature, 453:980–982. Shrader-Frechette, K. (1994). Ethics of Scientific Research. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Shuchman, M. (2000). Consequences of blowing the whistle in medical research. Annals of Internal Medicine, 131:1013–1015. Vandekerckhove, W. and Commers, M. S. R. (2004). Whistle blowing and rational loyalty. Journal of Business Ethics, 53:225–33. Varelius, J. (2009). Is whistle-blowing compatible with employee loyalty? Journal of Business Ethics, 85:263–275. 129 Downloaded by [ ] at 06:11 03 November 2011