Much of the recent literature on social research with children advocates the use of participatory techniques. This article attempts to rethink such techniques in several ways. The authors argue that participatory approaches, in their insistence that children should take part in research, may in fact involve children in processes that aim to regulate them. Using examples drawn from their own work, the authors question whether participatory methods are necessary for children to exercise agency in research encounters. They conclude by suggesting that researchers working with children might benefit from an attitude of methodological immaturity.This article arose out of a shared concern about the increasing dominance of 'participatory' approaches to research involving children, and the uncritical ways in which they are often deployed in such research. This concern has at times made us both feel somewhat 'out of place' as (ostensibly) 'children's geographers' working within the broader field of childhood studies. In this field, participatory research methods are almost universally lauded -and it is easy to see why. Against the backdrop of the objectification of children by traditional and psychological social research, participatory approaches appear emancipatory and democratic, respecting children's agency as individuals in their own right. Furthermore, participatory approaches seem to have an epistemological advantage over more traditional approaches; they promise to access the perspectives of the children being researched, rather than the perspectives of the adult researchers. On the surface at least, these features are very attractive. However, we want to argue that this attractiveness may obscure the problems of these approaches. In the interests of increasing our understanding of such approaches, we want to examine some of these problems.In so doing, we hope to build on critiques of participatory methods within development studies (such as Cooke and Kothari, 2001) and human geography (e.g. Kesby, 2000; Pain, 2004).After considering what participatory methods are, and how they have come to be employed in childhood research, we can begin to question whether 'participatory methods' can deliver all that they promise. We do so by examining the ontological and epistemological assumptions on which they are premised. We use the notion of 'active participation' to unpick concepts of 'empowerment', 'intentionality' and 'agency' that are embedded in the broadly Cartesian subjectivity that underpins 'participatory methods'. Following from this, we start to think beyond 'participation', using some brief empirical examples from our own research to problematize the power relationships in research encounters. This allows us to set out what we believe to be a more useful model of emergent subjectivity, from which we can advocate a position of methodological immaturity in research, which admits to vulnerability and fallibility. In doing so, we are not offering any advice on technique. Rather we seek to offer a broad metho...

No abstract

No abstract

Adolescents and parents reported under-use of epinephrine auto-injectors. Carriage is insufficient to ensure that auto-injectors are used. Barriers to use are multiple and complex, and unlikely to be overcome using simple educational interventions. Auto-injector training currently offered is often inadequate preparation for an emergency. A more comprehensive approach is needed, addressing the psychosocial dimensions of anaphylactic emergencies as well as treatment. Training should ideally be provided by specialist allergists or nurses, but can also be provided and reinforced in primary care.

In this paper, I argue that Foucault's work on power off ers a distinctive and original perspective with the potential to aff ord insights into the nature of participation. I begin by providing a brief exegesis of Foucault's conceptualisation of power in his middle to late work. Th e notion of governmentality is drawn out as a potentially useful tool in understanding participation as a profoundly ambiguous phenomenon. I conclude by outlining some of the possible implications of Foucault's thinking about power for studying children's participation.