Access or Egress? Questioning the “Ethics” of Ethics Committee Review for an Ethnographic Doctoral Research Study in a Childbirth Setting

Abstract

In this article, we discuss the principal difficulties in gaining ethics approval for an ethnographic midwifery doctoral research project in a hospital setting in South Australia. The research focus is on the various personal, social, institutional and cultural influences on women making a choice about whether or not to use epidural analgesia in labour. The obstacles encountered in gaining human research ethics committee (HREC) approval are discussed within the wider context of the benefits of ethnography as a research methodology, as well as the potential consequences to ethnography when assessed by quantitative research standards. By sharing our experience, we add to the current literature debating the "ethics" of ethics committee review in qualitative research approval. Engaging with the academic debate surrounding "ethics creep" -the increasing jurisdiction of ethics committees over research design -we consider the possibility of moving beyond principle-based ethics towards an ethical theory that more fully addresses the complexities of ethnographic research.

Video ethnography during and after caesarean sections: methodological challenges

“…Other ethnographic studies have similarly reported that this method has brought insight into cultural norms in the hospital maternity system (Newnham et al . ). To obtain this data in the hospital setting, there were challenges that needed to be overcome.…”

“…, Newnham et al . ) and attended the ethics committee meetings to promote confidence in their research (Simmons ). With persistence and continued communication, ethics approval can be achieved.…”

“…It is a powerful tool that allows the world to be observed many times, delivers in-depth access to events which can be scrutinised and provides insight into what is being viewed (Heath 2010, Luff & Heath 2012. Other ethnographic studies have similarly reported that this method has brought insight into cultural norms in the hospital maternity system (Newnham et al 2013). To obtain this data in the hospital setting, there were challenges that needed to be overcome.…”

‘It's your body, but…’ Mixed messages in childbirth education: Findings from a hospital ethnography

“…Consent during the participant observation on labour ward was assumed, with well-disseminated information about the study and researcher disclosure. Staff could opt-out of the research by signing a written opt-out form but no-one availed of this (see Newnham et al, 2013). All midwives verbally consented to the presence of the researcher in their antenatal class and the researcher was introduced as such to the class participants.…”

Critical Medical Anthropology in Midwifery Research

“…Written consent was gained from the women who participated in the study. Consent for the site observation was more difficult to obtain and this has been discussed elsewhere (Newnham, Pincombe, & McKellar, 2013). Once Newnham had access to the field, hospital staff were widely informed and given the opportunity to opt out.…”