I cannot understand the arguments and anger of many commenters. Yes, Star Trek always strives to show an inclusive, cooperative and collaborative working environment. But that is based on mutual respect. And with Starfleet in mind, that means everyone follows Starfleet's ideals and abides by the rules and command structure. Everyone is encouraged to express their opinion, but when it comes to orders, they must be followed. This also means that subordinates should trust their superiors, should follow their orders and respect their decisions. In addition, Starfleet officers are usually experts - explorers and scientists who strive to discover new things and improve the peaceful coexistence of different species in the galaxy. Self-interest and addiction to profiling are not at the top of the list.
This Edward is nothing like Barclay - that's the comparison some commentators make here. Barclay is shy and also a bit socially awkward. But he is an excellent engineer and he lives the ideals of Star Fleet. He wants to help others and he doesn't do anything that could harm anyone. He's just not used to dealing with other people and needs a little help from his comrades. Edward, on the other hand, seems to be a sociopath. He complains about his captain behind her back - that alone is not the Star Trek philosophy. He ignores orders, he experiments with genetic modifications (which is forbidden), he endangers the lives of his comrades and that of the ship. He is also not a solitary scientist who only has the best interests at heart. On the contrary. He doesn't even help contain the threat after his experiment goes wrong. The fact that someone like that is even a science officer in Starfleet and serves on a spaceship is a slap in the face.
Of course you can say that the captain doesn't exactly act like a captain either. This woman appears to have little to no leadership experience. She was probably promoted straight away without ever being number one. The way she tries to end the conversation seems amateurish. But she doesn't have to play best friend and listen to Edward's whining either. It is her prerogative as the captain to have him transferred if he has abused her trust. And he has. Picard, Pike or Janeway would probably have reacted even harder, more professionally though, but the result would have been the same. A guy like that wouldn't have been a valued officer on either the Enterprise or Voyager.
This Edward is nothing like Barclay - that's the comparison some commentators make here. Barclay is shy and also a bit socially awkward. But he is an excellent engineer and he lives the ideals of Star Fleet. He wants to help others and he doesn't do anything that could harm anyone. He's just not used to dealing with other people and needs a little help from his comrades. Edward, on the other hand, seems to be a sociopath. He complains about his captain behind her back - that alone is not the Star Trek philosophy. He ignores orders, he experiments with genetic modifications (which is forbidden), he endangers the lives of his comrades and that of the ship. He is also not a solitary scientist who only has the best interests at heart. On the contrary. He doesn't even help contain the threat after his experiment goes wrong. The fact that someone like that is even a science officer in Starfleet and serves on a spaceship is a slap in the face.
Of course you can say that the captain doesn't exactly act like a captain either. This woman appears to have little to no leadership experience. She was probably promoted straight away without ever being number one. The way she tries to end the conversation seems amateurish. But she doesn't have to play best friend and listen to Edward's whining either. It is her prerogative as the captain to have him transferred if he has abused her trust. And he has. Picard, Pike or Janeway would probably have reacted even harder, more professionally though, but the result would have been the same. A guy like that wouldn't have been a valued officer on either the Enterprise or Voyager.