Accounting for Ethos or Programmes for Conduct? The Brave New World of Research Ethics Committees

Abstract

This paper examines the operation of power and its consequences arising from the growth of new ethical bureaucracies in universities. We use the UK as a case study to illustrate more general points about the globalised nature and impact of such bureaucratisation. Our focus is on the social sciences as this is where, we argue, the impact is likely to be most marked. The paper is organised in five sections. The first introduces our concerns. Section 2 traces the genealogy of these new regimes of control in the UK. We then problematise the new ethical bureaucracies, making an analysis in terms of the shift in the locus of power away from researchers to becoming centralised in bureaucratic structures. In section 4 we explore some of the ways in which researchers might respond to the changing regimes of ethical control. Finally, we offer considerations of the ways in which ethical governance of research might be differently conducted so as to avoid the adverse consequences of new regimes of control on research practice. Our aim is to provoke debate and thereby contribute to a platform from which to reassert ways to ensure that research is ethical and that do not interfere with the production and consumption of critical social science.

Research ethics committees: values and power in higher education

“…Or put another way, it would appear that philosophical debates on matters pertaining to morals, ethics, standards and principles have been sidelined, if not entirely replaced, with the creation of procedures, rules and regulations and so we have witnessed the transmogrification of research ethics to research governance. Boden et al (2009) starkly demonstrate how modern ethical bureaucracy is a chimera that masks hidden power and is far removed from critical debate on ethical conduct.…”

“…First, known incidents of deception are rare but have been shocking enough to cause institutional reform (Kent et al, 2002). In the UK, the most influential episodes involved the scandal of unauthorised use of human tissue for research at Bristol Royal Infirmary and Alder Hey Children's Hospital in Liverpool during the 1990s (Truman 2003;Boden et al 2009). Even though medical ethics committees were operational at this time, having been set up in the 1960s to review pharmaceutical clinical trials, infant body parts were being retained without parental knowledge and consent (Hedgecoe, 2008;Boden et al 2009).…”

“…In the UK, the most influential episodes involved the scandal of unauthorised use of human tissue for research at Bristol Royal Infirmary and Alder Hey Children's Hospital in Liverpool during the 1990s (Truman 2003;Boden et al 2009). Even though medical ethics committees were operational at this time, having been set up in the 1960s to review pharmaceutical clinical trials, infant body parts were being retained without parental knowledge and consent (Hedgecoe, 2008;Boden et al 2009). Rather than attempt to resolve social relations between relevant parties, the response was to further expand the regulatory framework within health, resulting in significant impact on other areas of research (Boden et al 2009;ESRC 2005 and 2010).…”

“…The practical concerns of research governance, including institutional risk management, have become equated with 'ethics'. In other words ethical regulation is a technological and social process, centred on issues of power and culture (Boden et al 2009). We strongly believe that philosophical deliberations on ethics must be nurtured despite the output-led environment of regulation and bureaucracy that pervades the modern university; hence our question whether there is any way in which the pragmatic components of ethical review can be rescued and turned into a valuable part of the social research process.…”

Covert research and adult protection and safeguarding: an ethical dilemma?

“…Information, however, can skew research and it is argued it may undermine the validity of observations and data at times, especially in care settings in which vested interests may not want everyday practices to be exposed. Boden et al (2009) argue that reliance on informed consent as a paramount moral safeguard obscures ethical issues regarding potential poor outcomes for participants or their right to withdraw co-constructed knowledge. What is also apparent is that trust in some research relationships, especially those using an ethnographic approach, develops over time and, therefore, information flow and amount, and its timing, must also be considered.…”