…in the records disposition of this twin study. Yale pulls this kind of stuff
Neubauer conceived the experiment to compare the development of separated sets of twins and triplets with fellow psychiatrist Viola Bernard, to explore one of psychology’s most pressing questions — that of nature versus nurture, or whether human behavior is more affected by environment or genetics. Researchers did not obtain the consent of participants or their adoptive families. They also failed to inform families that their child had been separated from a twin during the adoption process or in their later observation of the children, according to Sharon Morello, one of the subjects of the study.
Compounds it with obfuscation
Many of Neubauer’s subjects have encountered issues accessing the records now housed at Yale. For instance, in 2011, the Jewish Board denied two separated twins — Howard Burack and Doug Rausch — the request for access to the sealed records in a letter that claimed they were never participants of the study. Ultimately, Shinseki helped them prove their participation.
… redactions to the materials were made to ensure the privacy of other subjects.
Morello received a limited selection of 700 pages about two years ago, but frequent redactions made them nearly undecipherable “black pages of nothing,” she said. She has not received any of the photos or videos researchers recorded — though Yale University Library’s guide to the records lists that the films and tapes are stored in Boxes 50-58 in Yale’s Library Shelving Facility in Hamden, Connecticut. Morello feels strongly that 12 years of research must have yielded more than 700 pages of material.
And then tops it all off with a big frackin’ lie
“I don’t think [the study] would be allowed to go forward under current standards,” Latham told the News last week. “But you have to bear in mind that the study was set up well before any of our current regulations were in place … we didn’t have our rules governing research on human subjects until decades after. We don’t commonly retroactively apply ethical standards.”
So all the fuss about Calhoun College is what?
But today there are reports that the British government has said that it will not offer asylum to Asia Bibi. The reason being “security concerns” — that weasel term now used by all officialdom whenever it needs one last reason to avoid doing the right thing.
Thanks to Douglas Murray, writing in the National Review, for explaining the term. I see university officials using it quite frequently.
My workplace has a new President; based on his periodic pronouncements I’ve started calling him President Diversity. Notre Dame’s Professor Patrick Deneen calls this The Ignoble Lie:
Meritocratic ideology disguises the ruling class’s own role in perpetuating inequality from itself, and even fosters a broader social ecology in which those who are not among the ruling class suffer an array of social and economic pathologies that are increasingly the defining feature of America’s underclass. Facing up to reality would require hard questions about the agenda underlying commitments to “diversity and inclusion.” Our stated commitment to “critical thinking” demands no less, but such questions are likely to be put down—at times violently—on contemporary campuses.
The Justice Department and the Census Bureau are engaged in a kerfuffle over the 2020 Census. It’s all about a question of citizenship: “What country are you a citizen of?” With the inevitable congressional reapportionment that occurs based on the Census, this is a question that many states really don’t want to know the answer to.
My take: the Census Bureau has been crying poor for years now. The Trump Administration should jawbone Congress into increasing the Bureau’s funding, but only if they ASK THE QUESTION (and report the answers).
Update: Now folks should really be worried. Combine citizenship data with Google location data (“we have ways to make you opt in”), and some dedicated data miners could find every Android-using illegal alien in the country.
Tips from the Instapundit, where the signal-to-noise ratio seems to be increasing lately.
Update: It has come to my attention that at least one other branch of the federal government already ASKS THE QUESTION, to wit, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives* E-Form 4473, Firearms Transaction Record has Questions 12 and 13:
In other words, you cannot exercise your 2nd Amendment right to own a firearm unless you ANSWER THE QUESTION.
* Or what I call a Redneck Hedge Fund.
Writing in the New York Times Magazine, Jennifer Percy describes Fear of the Federal Government in the Ranchlands of Oregon. Try though she might, her east coast acculturation won’t let her quite get into the heads of the folks in towns where she spent her childhood.
They visited Yellowstone Nation Park and saw, they said, two million acres of natural resources gone to waste. “At least one day a year,” Robin said, “we ought to be able to go in and take advantage.”
Emily thought the trees were too close together. “Didn’t look healthy,” she said, “because they don’t log.”
“And look at all those buffalo,” Robin said. “Can’t some of them be used for meat?”
“You wanted to eat them?” I said.
Why not Jennifer? American Indians do.
I tried to suggest a lack of understanding between rural and urban people, but Robin stopped me. “No,” she said. “We just want different things.” The statement was cold and clear. It suggested the end of reconciliation. “We don’t want you breathing down our back,” she said. “Bottom line is we don’t trust you. We don’t trust you to look out for our best interests. An in truth we don’t even know that you know how to. A lot of people were saying this was about saving the bunnies and butterflies, but that’s not what is is about.”
Robin sat over her empty plate. “It’s about getting people off the land,” she said. “It’s dark.”
Environmentalists with national influence have never been interested in reconciliation, but poor Jennifer won’t admit it.