Back to Search Start Over

Authors' Response.

Authors :
Stephan, Carl N.
Ross, Ann H.
Source :
Journal of Forensic Sciences. Sep2019, Vol. 64 Issue 5, p1579-1582. 4p.
Publication Year :
2019

Abstract

As a consequence of an inability to disassociate their preconceived notions of Code "rules" from what it is we in fact wrote [1], Dr. Albanese and Dr. Cardoso inadvertently entangle themselves in multiple and often contradictory nonissues with regards to the Code. As a disclosure tool, which is I voluntary i and I nonenforceable i , Dr. Albanese and Dr. Cardoso have seemingly little to fear - our Code amounts on paper to nothing more than a suggestion and one that collection managers are free to ignore if they so choose. The Code was never intended to represent the "be-all and end-all" of skeleton curation practice as Dr. Albanese and Dr. Cardoso [13] emotionally project. If collection managers are unable to maintain individual privacy when addressing the Code, as Dr. Albanese and Dr. Cardoso suggest, then this in itself raises substantial red flags to curation practices. [Extracted from the article]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
00221198
Volume :
64
Issue :
5
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
Journal of Forensic Sciences
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
138413827
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14079