The Best Way To Blow the Whistle

bmahersciwriter writes "Helene Hill thought she was close to retirement when, on a whim one day, she decided to check on a junior colleague's cell cultures. They were empty, she says, yet he produced data from them soon after. Blowing the whistle on what she thinks was research misconduct cost her 14 years and $200,000. See how she and other whistleblowers fared in this story from Nature."

Comments

Misleading Summary

[LordLucless]

Blowing the whistle on what she thinks was research misconduct cost her 14 years and $200,000.

What actually happened, from the article: she thinks a colleague forged results, and spent 14 years and $200,000 voluntarily pursuing court action, which repeatedly found there was no wrong-doing. She was not fired, was not fined, was not imprisoned.

The summary's deliberately phrased to be inflammatory, and imply that she was persecuted for whistle-blowing.

explained

[phantomfive]

Blowing the whistle on what she thinks was research misconduct cost her 14 years and $200,000.

This sounds juicy, and if you read the actual article, it is.

If anyone is wondering why it cost her $200,000 (and doesn't want to read the article, though I couldn't imagine why), it's because after the university committee on ethics determined that there was no evidence of misconduct, she decided to file a lawsuit, which she also lost.

Even after losing the lawsuit, she is still trying to get her coworker disciplined, which is why the dean warned her that she could lose her job as a result. But she is continuing. Choice quote from the article, in explanation of why she continues the fight:

“I want to finish,” she says. “It becomes almost an obsession.”