But the question of who should compensate the test subjects remains unanswered. Both Harvard officials and task force members have declined to discuss the matter.

Some advocates for the retarded are calling for Harvard and MIT to pay up. The research institutions, however, may look to the deep pockets of the federal government, which licensed the radioactive material used in some of the experiments.

One way Harvard may try to avoid compensating victims is to argue that it is not responsible for the actions of its researchers. That argument may strain credibility because documents show that University scientists were listing their Harvard titles in correspondence regarding the experiments.

Stewart L. Udall Secretary of the Interior under President Jimmy Carter and author of a book on Cold War radiation experiments says Harvard bears "a serious responsibility that can't be disavowed."

"I was surprised when I read that institutions of the caliber of Harvard and MIT would have been involved," Udall says. "The ethical violations are egregious."

"The people who are saying 'don't judge what they did then by the standard of today'...I think that's outrageous because the medical ethics of the 1940s on this subject were no different than the medical ethics of today," says Udall, who is 74. "The Nuremburg trial of the Nazi doctors received widespread publicity- I remember it well."

David H. Dockham '58 an advocate for the retarded, says the experiments with radiation conducted on retarded children at Fernald and Wrentham violated the standards of the 1947 Nuremburg Code, which established the notion of "informed consent."

The code states that "voluntary consent of the human subject [of experimentation] is essential."

In a letter sent last week to President Neil L. Rudenstine and the Harvard Corporation, Dockham requests an "unconditional and constructive apology for Harvard's involvement in deception and consequent failure to achieve fully informed consent."

"We executed something like 17 people over these issues," says Dockham, in reference to the Nuremburg trials. "The least we can do is take them seriously ourselves."

Udall, too, believes an apology is in order.

"I would think an apology would be the bare minimum thing that could be done," says Udall, who has represented test subjects in lawsuits against the federal government.

Could It Happen Again?

Most recently, questions have surfaced about Harvard's current regulations concerning human subject research and whether violations similar to those occurred at the state schools could happen in 1994.

The policy, adopted by the Corporation in 1981, says a committee on human subject research may waive the requirement of informed consent under certain circumstances.