Ethical moments: future directions for ethical review and ethnography

Abstract

The relationship between ethnographic approaches to research and the mechanisms for ethical review that are now being put in place to oversee that research results in significant tensions. This article draws on the author's experience of ethical review systems and interviews with research students in order to explore the nature of these tensions and the consequences they have for how ethnography is conducted now and in the future. A fundamental distinction is identified between an ethics of the body (with a person attached) and an ethics of the person (with a body attached). The former is described in terms of conventional ‘human subject research’ with a genealogy rooted in the Nuremburg Code. The latter opens up the possibility of an ethics of ‘social subject research’ which provokes ethical reflection on what it is to engage with the ‘open subject’. The article concludes by presenting research as a series of ethical moments which arise throughout research and on into the writing up of ethnography rather than as a single moment at its outset. Résumé La relation entre les approches ethnographiques de la recherche et les mécanismes de vérification éthique qui se mettent en place pour superviser ces recherches est une source d'importantes tensions. L'auteur tire ici parti de son expérience des systèmes de revue éthique et d'entretiens avec des étudiants chercheurs pour explorer la nature de ces tensions et leurs conséquences sur la manière dont l'ethnographie est menée aujourd'hui et le sera demain. Il identifie une distinction fondamentale entre l'éthique du corps (auquel une personne est attachée) et l'éthique de la personne (à laquelle un corps est attaché). La première est décrite en termes de « recherche sur un sujet humain » conventionnelle, avec une généalogie remontant au Code de Nuremberg. La deuxième ouvre la possibilité d'une éthique la « recherche sur un sujet social », qui suscite une réflexion éthique sur ce qu'est l'approche du « sujet ouvert ». L'article se conclut en présentant la recherche comme une série de moments éthiques qui surviennent à chaque étape du travail, jusqu'à la mise par écrit de l'ethnographie, plutôt que comme un moment unique au tout début.

Procedure versus process: ethical paradigms and the conduct of qualitative research

“…Even within the time frame through which current Western bioethics has developed post World War Two, sensibilities have altered in relation to acceptable methods and topics of research and undoubtedly they will change again. The abusive medical experiments of the Nazi regime occurred within a system of regulated research [4,16,54], while the elaboration of guidelines for ethical research has not prevented continuing abuse or mishap, albeit as a (hopefully) infrequent occurrence [55,56]. We look askance at studies undertaken by some previous investigators from the 1960s and 1970s [57-61] through to the present day [62].…”

“…Qualitative research depends not just on the willing cooperation of respondents, but on their engagement and collaborative input : it is in the process of engagement between researcher and participant(s) that ‘data’ are generated and the research can be accomplished [18,29,42,44,102-104]. The researcher connects with participants, on the basis of reciprocal exchange, through a personal rather than a contractual relationship, and within a relatively even social field [16,105]. The participant needs to get something positive out of the encounter to sustain continuing involvement.…”

“…By its nature, qualitative research is flexible, emergent and negotiated: the direction of enquiry and even the research question cannot be precisely anticipated in advance, and may alter in response to emerging findings [16,18,29,42,83,102,106]. This is particularly true in relation to ethnographic observation.…”

“…Far from promoting ethical research it has been argued that the rigidity of procedural ethics is deskilling. Rather than encouraging ethical discussion and deliberation - the development of ‘ethical mindfulness’ - procedural codes and regulations merely serve to undercut the researcher’s integrity and judgement [5,16,18,22,28,44,140]. …”

“…In relation to qualitative and health services research there is concern that researchers are being deterred from undertaking studies involving sensitive topics and vulnerable populations. As a result research questions are being censored, methods skewed and questions abandoned as a result of the real and anticipated difficulties of securing research governance approvals [8,16-19]. …”