Start with this link
http://www.thestraights.com/people/medi ... search.htmthen almost at the bottom of that page there is a hyperlink highlighted in blue to a paper by Peter Miller on the nature of Schwartz' ethical violations.
As a survivor of Straight, and as a sometime student of human-studying subjects like sociology and psychology, I would like to comment on what bothers me about this. First of all, Schwartz without a doubt crossed a big line. And that is, you have to have uncoerced consent to do any kind of research on humans, even if it is counting how many times the people on the first row of blue chairs pick their noses as compared to the last row of chairs. Now, you yourself can carry a pad and pencil around all day long taking notes on things people do and sit down to dinner with friends and family and talk about it, not a problem. But you cannot, not even for a low-level university course, have and use these notes, your observations - and this would absolutely include the kind of survey research Schwartz was into - without consent, and without submitting some kind of Human Subjects Research Protocol permission form to the appropriate agency for review. Your subject(s) has to sign a form, at their own true will.
Next, there is the aspect that Schwartz USED us for his own gain, to get published. He did his so-called science on us, he got his name in research journals, and advanced his own career. Probably anyone familiar with the sum totality of coercion at Straight will see right off that if minors are in a thought reform program they are inherently abused, inherently coerced, and therefore are inherently unable to give consent. Interestingly, the website of his current workplace, advancedpediatrics.com, reveals that the pediatric clinic is involved in research. No, not just interestingly, but of serious concern. Because as far as I know, Schwartz has never apologized for his involvement, spoken out about the abuse, or in any other way given any indication that he is not just as much and easily involved in ethically corrupt research practices. So he is probably the kind of person that feels he has a more special vision of what is necessary than those from whom he is obligated to get fully informed and uncoerced consent. In other words, this ratty-rat-rat has never sat against a wall and done a good think on what he did wrong back in the 1980s at Backlick Road in Springfield. And I find that irritating.
Also irritating is that, to us, he represents his profession, both as a doctor of person medicine and as a researcher using human subjects. He violates twice our sense of trust in the greater society.
I am disturbed, very disturbed, that Straight, Inc., even HAD a Director of Medical Research position (I haven't finished looking into who was in this position). Again, you MAY NOT conduct research on humans without following established protocol, one key point of this being that you must have the consent of your subject. Just like as in a legal contract, the subject has to be uncoerced and be of sound mind and body, all that.
And beyond that I am disturbed that they were "studying" us regarding suicide and cutting, among other things.
Personally, I have seen at least on published journal report by or using Schwartz' research, and I thought it was whack science.
Before I sign off, I would like to say, I think by my wording of the original post, saying that Schwartz was involved in "highly" unethical research, I probably got people thinking that he was pumping us with drugs without our informed and proper consent, and then studying the effects, or that he was involved in some shady shits with, say, the CIA, really taking even a few people and seriously studying the before and after and the long term effects of what was at that time already known to be thought reform, experimental in nature, and potentially very damaging. But surely those adults involved would draw the line at making a child client wear nothing but a diaper in front of other child clients.
