I'd like to comment on the following excerpts from the lab safety
discussion:
>>The assumption here is that violations have occurred, that laws were
>>broken, that crimes were committed.
>>Did any violation occur? I see no evidence. Were laws broken? I
>>seen no evidence. Were crimes committed? I see no evidence.
>Whoa--no one's *really* assuming anything. But when a student asks for
>help on a public forum because she feels that her mentor doesn't seem to
>take her safety concerns seriously, it doesn't seem unreasonable to ask
>if he could be giving her poor guidance. Nobody is really talking about
>*crimes*, but about occupational hazards to a student that might be caused
>by her advisor's unwillingness to comply with what he might consider
>'overcautious'. No one's putting him on trial in the real world...
Well, someone should be putting him on trial in the real world. Or the
responsibility should be placed on the educational centre.
I went through a typical undergrad bio degree and got a job in a private
lab. Although I have an average amount of common sense, the possibilities
for harm are innumerable. Eventually there was an incident caused by
insufficient training-luckily not permanently damaging.
Who is to blame? The university I attended, the individual professors or
lab instructors, the employer, the employee?
Compare this situation to construction work, etc...
If I had been hurt, what are my prospects for medical support or
disability? Even worse, what if I had hurt someone else?
This issue is much larger than whether mentors are fulfilling their role.
It illustrates a weakness in the entire profession that must be changed.
These students are not always going to have mentors-very soon they will be
mentors.
