The sin of omission was Boston's, not ours

February 2, 2012

Your readers will emerge much better informed about the Boston College-Belfast Project case having read Peter Geoghegan's informed piece rather than John Brewer's speculative letter on the subject (respectively, "If trust is lost, future promises naught but troubles for research", 19 January, and "Inescapable burden of 'guilty knowledge'", 26 January). Geoghegan at least spent considerable time researching before he wrote.

In his letter, Brewer claims that "this is not a tale of researchers betrayed by Boston College", before going on to allege that the research team (of which I was a member) was largely responsible for its own misfortune. Clearly, sense gives way to servility. Don't offend the institution, old chap - what say you?

While admitting that the Belfast Project was laudable to begin with, Brewer switches lanes to charge that it was compromised by project leader Ed Moloney's publication of the book Voices from the Grave (2010). If it were so obvious, as Brewer claims, that the police would come looking for the tapes upon publication of the book, why didn't Boston College with its phalanx of lawyers state this at the time rather than press for publication while securing royalty contracts for two of its senior staff?

Brewer makes the point that "informed-consent forms always explain that confidentiality will be maintained only to the full extent provided under the law". Always...except when the forms are issued by Boston College. You would imagine that an informed writer would draw attention to the fact that nothing of the sort was explained in the consent form drawn up by the institution and given to the interviewees.

The contract form stated explicitly that the interviewee would have "ultimate power" of release. So when Brewer pleads, "spare a thought for the respondents duped by the reported concealment from them of the risks of participating", he fails to mention it was concealment perpetrated by the institution responsible for drawing up the contract - Boston College.

Moloney was of course right when he suggested that this was one reason why Boston College never made the risks explicit in the contract. That's why he told The Boston Globe newspaper that had the college done so there would have been no Belfast Project. Neither Moloney nor I would have been associated with it.

Anthony McIntyre, Drogheda, Republic of Ireland

You've reached your article limit.

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Featured Jobs

Most Commented

Daniel Mitchell illustration (29 June 2017)

Academics who think they can do the work of professional staff better than professional staff themselves are not showing the kind of respect they expect from others

As the pay of BBC on-air talent is revealed, one academic comes clean about his salary

A podium constructed out of wood

There are good reasons why some big names are missing from our roster

Senior academics at Teesside University put at risk of redundancy as summer break gets under way

Thorns and butterflies

Conditions that undermine the notion of scholarly vocation – relentless work, ubiquitous bureaucracy – can cause academics acute distress and spur them to quit, says Ruth Barcan