Unethical documentation practices

Unethical archival procedures
Irresponsible librarianship
Irresponsible information system design
Corruption of documentalists
Irresponsible data handling
Deliberate misleading identification
Unethical practices in classification
Misconduct of librarians
Negligent bibliographic practices
Abuse of cataloguing

Nature

Unethical documentation practices refer to the intentional creation, alteration, omission, or misrepresentation of information in official records, reports, or documents. These practices undermine the integrity, accuracy, and reliability of documentation, often for personal, organizational, or financial gain. Common examples include falsifying data, backdating records, omitting critical information, or forging signatures. Such actions can lead to legal consequences, loss of trust, compromised decision-making, and harm to individuals or organizations. Unethical documentation is a significant problem in fields such as healthcare, business, research, and law, where accurate and honest records are essential for accountability and transparency.

Background

Unethical documentation practices gained global attention in the late 20th century as high-profile cases of falsified records, data manipulation, and misrepresentation emerged across sectors such as healthcare, finance, and scientific research. International scandals, including fraudulent clinical trial reports and corporate accounting deceptions, highlighted the widespread nature and severe consequences of such practices. Subsequent investigations and regulatory responses underscored the urgent need for transparency and accountability in documentation processes worldwide.

Incidence

Unethical documentation practices are reported across a wide range of sectors globally, including healthcare, legal, academic, and corporate environments. These practices, which involve falsification, omission, or manipulation of records, undermine trust, compromise safety, and can lead to significant financial and reputational damage. The prevalence of such incidents is difficult to quantify due to underreporting, but high-profile cases and investigative reports indicate that the problem is persistent and widespread, affecting both developed and developing countries.
In 2022, a major scandal emerged in the United Kingdom when the Post Office Horizon IT inquiry revealed that hundreds of sub-postmasters were wrongly prosecuted based on falsified documentation and manipulated digital records, resulting in wrongful convictions and severe personal consequences.

Claim

Under pressure from their employers, documentalists may bias the collection of information and the ways through which it may be accessed. These practices may include: the refusal of access, the refusal to hold certain categories of document (if they are considered offensive to certain scientific, moral, religious or aesthetic principles), biased classification of documents (possibly to the point of rendering them unretrievable), tampering with documents (including forgery, theft and destruction of documents), idiosyncratric design of classification systems to render access incompatible with other documentation systems, dispensing inaccurate or misleading information on the contents of the collection and the availability of documents, reservation of documents for users in exchange for financial or other favours.

Counter-claim

Frankly, the concern over "unethical documentation practices" is vastly overblown. In the grand scheme of workplace issues, minor lapses in documentation hardly warrant the attention they receive. Most professionals act in good faith, and the rare instances of unethical documentation have minimal real-world impact. Focusing on this so-called problem distracts from far more pressing challenges facing organizations today. It's simply not an important issue deserving significant worry or resources.