1) This is standard. It is a common commercial requirement. Before agreeing
to sign a commercial contract of this nature you should ask yourself if your
employers actually authorise you to enter into such a commitment on their
behalf. If you, or your managers, do not like it then you should either
renegotiate with Beckman or simply not do the evaluation. If any company
tries to impose a gagging clause that prevents you informing the MDA if you
find a major problem which they brush off, and continues to try after you
have told them of your concerns this will in due course inform your
purchasing strategy.
2) Consider the situation that might arise if you evaluate the instrument
and find that it is positively dangerous. Will your commercial contract's
confidentiality clause prevent you from whistle blowing? Probably not,
because there are limits on the duty of confidentiality, but if that did
happen batten down for a major stercor cascade. You should discuss that
eventuality with Beckman and at the very least negotiate IN WRITING a clause
in your contract that allows you to report what are in your judgement any
potential faults in the instrument that might put patients or staff at risk
to the MDA.
3) You may have an explicit or implicit obligation under the terms of good
practice set out by the organisation with which you hold professional
registration to whistle blow if you think any company might be about to
market a pile of dangerous junk for patient care purposes.
4) Which "professional organisation" do you have in mind? Not everyone
participating in this "Open discussion List for the academic community..."
is or would be happy to be a member of the ACB.
Robert Forrest
> -----Original Message-----
> From: This list is an open discussion list for the academic community
> working in [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
> Elizabeth Mac Namara
> Sent: 06 December 2001 18:34
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Beckman evaluations
>
>
> We are in the process of evaluating the new Beckman LH750 and have been
> asked to sign a form in which all the results of the evaluation are their
> property and we are not allowed to either publish or discuss the
> evaluation
> without their consent. Has anyone ever heard of this before. I
> think it is a
> very bad precedent and as a professional organisation we should have
> something to say about it.
>
> What do you think
>
> Elizabeth Mac Namara
>
|