Nearly 100 members of the UCLA research community aired their concerns - sometimes in a lively debate - about the often trying, yet necessary process of protecting the rights and welfare of human research subjects at an Oct. 4 Town Hall hosted by Executive Vice Chancellor Wyatt R. Hume, chair of UCLA's Human Research Policy Board.

"We have what is, in many ways, a strict and stringent process," Hume said. "In feedback we receive from around the country, we hear that UCLA has one of the strongest systems in the nation. We also get feedback from the campus - particularly from some of you here today - who tell us that it is also a difficult, intrusive process to deal with. We are interested in those concerns and want to deal with them."

The protection of human research subjects became a critical campus priority after a 1993 review by the National Institutes of Health found that UCLA's policies for protection of human research subjects was not in compliance with federal regulations. In response, UCLA established three Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) - two for the medical sciences and one for the general campus - to review all research protocols.

Among the most vocal critics at the Town Hall were those working in social science research, which many felt was misunderstood by those reviewing protocols and being held unnecessarily to the same strict standards as biomedical research. "The risk posed by asking questions is not the same," one social scientist noted.

"Unfortunately," responded Hume, "the same laws apply to biomedical sciences and social sciences. So we have to have a process that embraces all subjects."

Sociology Professor Donald Treiman said, "While I certainly appreciate the need for protection of research subjects ... the process could be a lot easier if the professional staff knew something about the social sciences. It's very hard to convey what, in fact, social scientists do. ... Just some education would go a long way toward smoothing out this process."

Sociology Professor Jack Katz maintained that the policies compromise his right to free speech. "The First Amendment gives me the right to ask my neighbors questions. But as a professor at UCLA, I have to get prior permission to do any inquiry or publication."

Others voiced concern about procedural roadblocks and the difficulties that arise in conducting research at multiple sites with multiple review boards. Hume agreed that this is a growing problem as multi-center clinical trials expand. One possible solution, he suggested, is to establish UCLA as the "service center" for the entire network of sites. However, he added, "We have to be assured that subjects 500 miles from here are being treated in the same way that they would be at UCLA.

"While, as an institution, we have met the needs of some researchers," Hume said, "it appears we haven't met the needs of humanities or social science research.

But Hume said, "I want you to be assured that we will address this, but, as we proceed, we are trying to maintain a balance. We don't want to get into a situation where human subjects are hurt or killed, and we don't want to get the institution closed down.

"On the other hand, we don't want the process to be so difficult that you can't get your work done," the executive vice chancellor said.