Parents might know what's best for their children, but do scientists?

Posted by Jesse Reynolds January 23, 2009
Biopolitical Times
Over the weekend, the New York Times ran on article on the trend for researchers to use their own children as test subjects. Most of the examples cited were innocuous enough, typically limited to observation without significant intervention. Obviously, no scientist-parent would knowingly harm their own child. Fortunately, the piece acknowledged the sometimes-unseen risks posed by this dual relationship:
Some research methods are clearly benign; others, while not obviously dangerous, might not have fully understood effects. Ethicists said they would consider participation in some projects acceptable, even valuable, but raised questions about the effect on the child, on the relationship with the parent, and on the objectivity of the researcher or the data.

“The role of the parent is to protect the child,” said Robert M. Nelson, director of the Center for Research Integrity at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “Once that parent becomes an investigator, it sets up an immediate potential conflict of interest. And it potentially takes the parent-child relationship and distorts it in ways that are unpredictable.”

Researchers themselves acknowledge the challenge of being simultaneously scientist and parent.

“I don’t want them to feel uncomfortable, like I’m invading their privacy,” said Dr. Linebarger, who ultimately set some boundaries. “When you mix being a researcher with being a parent, it can put your kids in an unfair place.”
While any use of human subjects must get approval from an Institutional Review Board, some researchers are not disclosing the participation of their children to the IRB:
Some scientists said that in studies with multiple subjects they considered it unnecessary to report their child’s participation, because they would face no greater risk than others. Some asserted that involving their children proved risks were minimal....

“I sign my own permission slips,” said Gedeon Deak, whose three sons have participated in his cognitive science studies at University of California, San Diego. He tells review boards his subjects are a “sample of convenience,” not randomly selected, but he has seen no need to specify that his sons are among the participants.
The scientists' confidence that they have the necessary skills and wisdom to decide what the IRB should know is the real danger, a situation that likely occurs more often than acknowledged.