Response 7
1) What are some of the similarities and potential differences in how the authors discuss/consider research ethics?
2) Both Brandt and Fisher include quotations from researchers (Brandt & Fisher), excerpts from reports (Brandt), first-person accounts from research participants (Fisher). What is the impact of including this information? Does it help to contextualize the issues the authors are discussing?
3) Reverby argues quite strongly about the importance of paying more attention to how we tell stories about research tragedies of the past. Instead of framing particular scientists or studies as especially evil, she argues that we must talk about the broader structural issues that enable such research. What do you think about Reverby’s argument? Does it challenge your understandings of research ethics?
