Six perspectives in search of an ethical solution: utilising a moral imperative with a multiple ethics paradigm to guide research-based theatre/applied theatre

Research-Based Theater in the Pediatric Oncology Setting: Balancing Ethical Tensions

“…Research-based theater (RbT) has been described as a hybrid of theater and research practices, an overarching term that can include both applied theater—a play used for extra-theatrical purposes—and ethnodrama—a play or performance devised from interview transcripts, field notes, journals, or letters (Bishop, 2014, pp. 65–66).…”

“…These imbalances can also carry forward into medical education, where senior medical teachers or clinicians are responsible for the majority of teaching as opposed to peers, patients, and other healthcare professionals (Bleakley, 2015, p. 4). As has been described in both theoretical and practical settings, RbT has the potential to exploit participants for the benefit of researchers (Bishop, 2014; Sindig et al, 2011). As reviewed by Bishop, James Thompson recognizes that RbT has the potential to redefine privilege, power, culture, language and justice (Bishop, 2014).…”

“…As has been described in both theoretical and practical settings, RbT has the potential to exploit participants for the benefit of researchers (Bishop, 2014; Sindig et al, 2011). As reviewed by Bishop, James Thompson recognizes that RbT has the potential to redefine privilege, power, culture, language and justice (Bishop, 2014). As described in other projects, when medical trainees were provided opportunities to experience RbT performances that articulated patient experiences and interactions with health care providers early in medical training, these trainees were able to reflect on ways that they could provide better patient-centered care in future (Rosenbaum et al, 2005).…”

“…conceptualised as passive recipients of information” (Guillemin & Cox, 2017, p. 144). As reviewed by Bishop, ethnodramatist Johnny Saldaña described a mantra of “participants first, playwrights second, and audiences third” (Bishop, 2014, pp. 69–70).…”

“…Saldaña elaborated that “participants’ desires for how they wish to be represented and presented,” should be paramount, followed by maintenance of academic and artistic integrity as a second responsibility (Bishop, 2014, p. 69). As for audiences, Saldaña felt strongly that individual reactions may be unpredictable, and his responsibilities end at the usual disclaimers that inform audiences about potentially harmful or offensive content, such as profanity, nudity, violence, special effects (strobe lights or smoke) that may cause physical reactions (Bishop, 2014, p. 70). Although this argument is valid, particularly when audiences choose to see theatrical pieces voluntarily, the threshold of responsibility was different in an educational context when audiences were required to view the piece as part of their curriculum.…”