Although gaining ethical approval is a conventional and established requirement for academic scholarship, institutional approaches remain subject to sustained critique. While not questioning the legitimacy of institutional ethical procedures, the dominance of legal frameworks and a focus on entry to ‘the field’ is inflexible and irresponsive to ethical complexities in practice. This is particularly evident in situations where participants experience ongoing trauma, marginalisation, and social and political precarity, or settings that we refer to in this paper as ‘ fragile contexts’. Responding to such ethical dilemmas, this article draws on Guillemin and Gillam’s (2004) notions of ‘ ethics-in-practice’ and ‘ethically important moments’ to examine how doctoral candidates and their supervisors navigate the compliance requirements of institutional ethics vis-à-vis the requirements of ethics-in-practice. Our findings foreground the need to attend to the linguistic and discursive challenges associated with research in fragile contexts, the temporalities of vulnerability, the management of community expectations, and a humbling of researchers and their institutional research ethics committees to avoid compounding injustices and power imbalances.