Victims in Our Own Minds? IRBs in Myth and Practice

Autonomy and Compliance: How Qualitative Sociologists Respond to Institutional Ethical Oversight

“…The most frequently cited account argues that ethical oversight emerged through historical contingency and the internal logic of bureaucracy rather than any real need to regulate the social sciences (Schrag 2009;Bledsoe et al 2007;Haggerty 2004;Fitzgerald 2004). Stark (2007), on the other hand, criticizes this approach as the "victim narrative," because it implies that ethical oversight resulted from some "terrible mistake" (p. 778). She argues instead that ethical oversight was essentially a rational response to real concerns over the ethics of human-based social scientific research (Stark 2007).…”

“…Stark (2007), on the other hand, criticizes this approach as the "victim narrative," because it implies that ethical oversight resulted from some "terrible mistake" (p. 778). She argues instead that ethical oversight was essentially a rational response to real concerns over the ethics of human-based social scientific research (Stark 2007). Finally, some scholars have adopted a Foucaultian-governmentality perspective, arguing that the rise of research ethics reflects a concerted effort to curtail academic freedom and make researchers accountable to the state and to capital (Dehli 2010;Dehli and Taylor 2006;Owram 2004;Halse and Honey 2007a).…”

“…Stark (2007) observed that committees establish "local precedents," which she describes as "short-hand rules based on previous cases that help board members make decisions that are internally consistent over time" (pp. 781-782).…”

“…However, ethics policies have also been defended as being far more flexible than critics often acknowledge (Stark 2007;Ells and Gutfreund 2006). Ells and Gutfreund (2006) point out a series of "myths" that have developed regarding Canada's national ethics policy, including the notion that anonymity must be guaranteed and that written consent forms are always required or expected to conform to a particular format.…”

“…Of course, while federal policies may be flexible, local interpretations have the potential to be more rigid. Thus, many of the defenders of ethics policies have advocated local reform rather than total rejection of ethical oversight (Stark 2007;Ells and Gutfreund 2006). As Katz (2006) argues, the issue of applicability is "not an inevitable result of [US] federal law.…”