 |
 |
Hi all, Alden wrote: Have you thought about negotiating with employers regarding the provision of paid time off for disabled employees to participate in research (research which can be said to benefit the employer in some direct or indirect way)? Why would I demand that somebody involved in production of for ex. cars should pay for necessary components in my research production? Alden then wrote: isn't the problem here to do with the way in which all welfare benefits are officially described as 'handouts' rather than 'social wages' - i.e. perhaps, payment for social participation? This debate seems to go much further than just disabled people, and should include all people who do not work (and don't have comfortable unearned incomes from investments etc) Yes it is, but the raised issue concerned payment for being research subjects. Sara on like subject: It could also be suggested that arguing for payment implies that only paid work is valuable? Context seems important. As a doctoral student I have to pay to do my research, I receive no grant . Equally I happily participate in any research that strikes me as interesting or useful.without even thinking of payment as an issue. If corporations are using research to further their own interests or something similar this feels different however Sarah. I would not really consider my own non-payment as an argument for not paying research subjects. There surely is a difference between arguing about the right or wrong to pay research subjects and the reality of no funding. I frequently do things for free as a disabled person; and I ask people to participate without payment when I do not have any funds for it - but I do include payment in project budgets and argue for funds when I can. And if I do not have funds (haven't succeeded getting them) I am probably doing the same as the most of you. At the moment I am working on a project doing interviews for internet radio. It has not money for payment for the persons interviewed, so what I can do is give them copies of their interviews and make sure they will get the programs on CD when they are ready - if possible all programs and not just the one the participated in. CD's are a cost I can draw from the budget and time to burn them is mine alone. Andy wrote: Susane. you are probably right. However I would like to think that there is moral analternative to a system that sell embrios, air, forest and clean water. So would I, but would you argue that you're changing the system by treating people differently within the present system? Timothy wrote: In the past year or two, there have been grave questions raised about bioethicists who are being paid (as consultants, not "employees") by a particular pharmaceutical company also giving and "ethical blessing" so to speak to that same firm. At last year's American Society for Bioethics and Humanities conference I attended one presentation where there was a very sharp exchange between one presenter (who seemed to hold that being paid inevitably skewed one's judgment) and an audience member, who identified herself as a paid consultant of a pharmaceutical firm who felt precisely the opposite. Ahhhh! So we should maybe ponder our own economic bonds. Which I personally think would be a far more interesting subject to discuss - and ultimately a far greater danger to the quality and usefulness of research. I'm rambling..... Susanne ---------------------------------------------------- Susanne Berg Institute on Independent Living project coordinator www.independentliving.org Luntmakargatan 86 A 113 51 Stockholm Sweden telephone/fax: +46 8 15 73 54 mobile phone: +46 705 15 73 56 e-mail home: [log in to unmask] Annual report: www.independentliving.org/docs1/ilanrp2001.html Årsberättelse: www.independentliving.org/docs1/ilarsbrtls2001.html ________________End of message______________________ Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List are now located at: www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.