Leveling the Playing Field? Exploring the Merits of the Ethics-as-Process Approach for Judging Qualitative Research Proposals

Abstract

There has been a recent growth in claims that qualitative research proposals are not treated equitably by ethics committees. In response, recent arguments centered on establishing the ethics of qualitative research, in the eyes of ethics committees, have indicated the need for an "ethics-as-process" approach. Accordingly, in this article, the authors illustrate the merits of this approach and provide three examples from the field: the outcomes of participating in qualitative interviews, sensitive handling of ending in qualitative research relationships, and the ongoing establishment of informed consent. The authors hope to increase awareness of the potential benefits of this approach and contribute to the ensuing debate.

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

“…In addition, because ethnographic research is not a one-off event or discrete episode, consent is more often seen as a process, an ongoing contract of negotiation, as experiences develop in the field (Cutcliffe & Ramcharan, 2002;de Laine, 1997;Murphy & Dingwall, 2007). Essentially, the researcher often does not know in advance the course the research will take, making it difficult to outline the full nature of the research, as requested by HRECs (Cutcliffe & Ramcharan, 2002;Karnieli-Miller et al, 2009).…”

“…Essentially, the researcher often does not know in advance the course the research will take, making it difficult to outline the full nature of the research, as requested by HRECs (Cutcliffe & Ramcharan, 2002;Karnieli-Miller et al, 2009). Qualitative methodologies are emergent, adaptive, and less predictable than biomedical research methodologies (Cutcliffe & Ramcharan, 2002;Flick, 2009;Katz, 2006), therefore setting out precise written consent forms can be problematic, but it does not then follow that the study is ipso facto unethical (de Laine, 1997).…”

“…Essentially, the researcher often does not know in advance the course the research will take, making it difficult to outline the full nature of the research, as requested by HRECs (Cutcliffe & Ramcharan, 2002;Karnieli-Miller et al, 2009). Qualitative methodologies are emergent, adaptive, and less predictable than biomedical research methodologies (Cutcliffe & Ramcharan, 2002;Flick, 2009;Katz, 2006), therefore setting out precise written consent forms can be problematic, but it does not then follow that the study is ipso facto unethical (de Laine, 1997). Furthermore, by regulating research within stringent guidelines of informed consent, critical research methodologies can be severely restricted, leading to the possibility that critical inquiry is abandoned by academics in favour of more amenable forms of research (Haggerty, 2004), and may also limit new knowledge production by curtailing academic freedom and creativity (Bledsoe et al, 2007; see also Hammersley, 2009) …”

“…The relational and empathic relationship building in qualitative research requires moral sensitivity and self-reflection, and the ability to anticipate potential situations that will require ethical consideration (Hewitt, 2007). These considerations will not necessarily have been foreseen prior to data collection, or written into ethics proposals, but the recognition that ethical concerns are ongoing can enhance the ethical direction of the research (Cutcliffe & Ramcharan, 2002). We recognise that field-site ethics is an intricate and thorny ethnographic question (for example, see Ellis, 1995;Blee & Currier 2011), and we do not mean to diminish the complexities of ethics in ethnography here.…”

Researching with Families: Ethical Issues and Situations

“…Recognising that our research participants are often marginalised in a range of ways, and that the research could be identified with intervention services, we have implemented strategies to ensure that gaining informed consent has been an ongoing, renegotiable process. Cutcliffe & Ramcharan (2002) refer to this as 'process-consent'.…”