Social death is apparent when people are considered unworthy of social participation and deemed to be dead when they are alive. Some marginalized groups are more susceptible to this treatment than others, and one such group is people with dementia. Studies into discrimination towards older people are well documented and serve as a source of motivation of older people's social movements worldwide. Concurrently, theories of ageing and care have been forthcoming in a bid to improve the quality of responses to older people in times of need. Included in this theorizing has been the analysis of values and approaches that paid carers convey to citizens who require their help. In this article, the values and approaches of social workers and mental health nurses bring to people with dementia are considered within the context of social life and social death. It is based on a small study that undertook to critically examine how participation of people with dementia was facilitated. A thanatological lens was used to interpret inclusive and exclusive practices which potentially create opportunity for participation or reinforce the loss of citizenship for older people with dementia.

This article draws on two studies that have used an ethic of care analysis to explore lay, nursing and social work care for people with dementia. It discusses the political as well as the practice application of ethic of care principles and highlights the necessity to understand both what people do and the meanings with which such practices are imbued in order to identify 'good care' and the relationship between this and social justice. Examples of care for people with dementia are discussed by reference to core principles of an ethic of care: attentiveness, responsibility, competence, responsiveness and trust. These illustrate the potential for the development of a shared language within which different disciplines, lay carers and people with dementia can communicate about how needs could best be met in complex and difficult circumstances.

Voices advocating radical challenges to traditional research practice and to our conceptions of how and what sort of knowledge is generated by researchers, have grown louder over the past decades. They have questioned the model of research that positions the people who are the focus of study as subjects, and those who research them as experts who can analyse and evaluate. They have called for a fundamental transformation of the nature of research, to centre alternative perspectives and ways of knowing, to reset research agendas around issues that are important to those who have been pushed to the societal margins, and to research those issues collaboratively.Advocates of these approaches have found a wider academic audience internationally, not least among qualitative researchers. The democratisation of research has been identified as one of the key methodological challenges of the 21st century (Crow, 2012). Reasons put forward for a transformation of conventional paradigms in qualitative and other research processes are ethical, political and pragmatic. They range across projects to address social justice and transform society (e.g. Mertens, 2009). Such endeavours encompass principles of democratic dialogue and participatory equality for all those involved in setting agendas for and practising research (e.g. Gustavsen, 2001) and the empowerment of those who are treated as the subjects of research. Other rationales concern cultural appropriateness and validity (e.g. Kirkhart, 2005). They also stretch to instrumental considerations around the recruitment of research participants and the need for research to demonstrate that it has an impact (Crow, 2010). These sorts of ideas about the transformation of research may also be linked to theorising about 'democratisation' since the mid-20th century, identifying the emergence of expectations of equal relationships and choices in lifestyles, coupled with calls for 'dialogic democracy' involving consultation and participation in decision-making within society generally (e.g. Beck and Beck Gernsheim, 2002;Giddens, 1992Giddens, , 1998. These societal shifts may be echoed in the practice of social research.This special issue of Qualitative Research brings together articles exploring the challenges posed both by, and for, the disruption of conventional research practice and implementation of democratic, transformative and collaborative knowledge production. Contributors reflect on the conduct of their research projects and on methodological issues in different international and local contexts. The special issue covers a range of alternative approaches to conventional research paradigms, aiming to promote dialogue between them. In this editorial we lay out the shared endeavours, but also the 706869Q RJ0010.1177/1468794117706869Qualitative ResearchEdwards and Brannelly editorial2017

The ethics of care is an emerging field of interest in many disciplines, including care for people with dementia. The ethics of care as proposed by Joan Tronto is a political argument for care together with a set of principles, the integrity of care, to guide and critique practice. This two-pronged approach enables on one hand, a political, complex and situated examination of inequality, and on the other hand the integrity of care provides a set of principles to guide inclusive citizenship practices. This approach has the significant advantage of recognition of the fight that people with dementia face to achieve rights and citizenship as an issue of social justice. In this paper, three challenges to citizenship are discussed in relation to people with dementia using an ethics of care lens: (a) citizenship as a relationship between the individual and the state; (b) citizenship as a practice and (c) citizenship as identity and belonging. I propose that citizenship can be achieved by promoting inclusion in defining and creating policy, research and practice.

Democratising methodologies often require research partnerships in practice. Research partnerships between indigenous and non-indigenous partners are commonplace, but there is unsatisfactory guidance available to non-indigene researchers about how to approach the relationship in a way that builds solidarity with the aims of the indigenous community. Worse still, non-indigenous researchers may circumvent indigenous communities to avoid causing offense, in effect silencing those voices. In this article, we argue that the ethics of care provides a framework that can guide ethical research practice, because it attends to the political positioning of the people involved, acknowledges inequalities and aims to address these in solidarity with the community. Drawing on our research partnership in Aotearoa New Zealand, we explain how the ethics of care intertwines with Māori values, creating a synergistic and dialogic approach.