Search

Abstract: This paper concentrates on controversies about children''s consent, and reviews how children''s changing status as competent decision makers about healthcare and research has gradually gained greater respect. Criteria for competence have moved from age towards individual children''s experience and understanding. Uncertain and shifting concepts of competence and its identification with adulthood and childhood are examined, together with levels of decision-making and models for assessing children''s competence. Risks and uncertainties, methods of calculating the frequency and severity of risks, the concept of ‘therapeutic research’ and problems of expanding consent beyond its remit are considered. The paper ends by considering how strengths and limitations in children''s status and capacities to consent can be mirrored in researchers’ and practitioners’ own status and capacities. Examples are drawn from empirical research studies about decision-making in healthcare and research involving children in the UK. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: In this paper we examine the application of informed consent to ethnographic research in health care settings. We do not quarrel with either the principle of informed consent or its translation into the requirement that research should only be carried out with consenting participants. However, we do challenge the identification of informed consent with the particular set of bureaucratic practices of ethical review which currently operate in Canada, the US and elsewhere. We argue that these anticipatory regulatory regimes threaten the significant contribution of ethnographic research to the creation of more efficient, more effective, more equitable and more humane health care systems. Informed consent in ethnographic research is neither achievable nor demonstrable in the terms set by anticipatory regulatory regimes that take clinical research or biomedical experimentation as their paradigm cases. This is because of differences in the practices of ethnographic and biomedical research which we discuss. These include the extended periods of time ethnographers spend in the research setting, the emergent nature of ethnographic research focus and design, the nature and positioning of risk in ethnographic research, the power relationships between researchers and participants, and the public and semi-public nature of the settings normally studied. Anticipatory regulatory regimes are inimical to ethnographic research and risk undermining the contribution of systematic inquiry to understanding whether institutions do what they claim to do, fairly and civilly and with an appropriate mobilisation of resources. We do not suggest that we should simply ignore ethics or leave matters to the individual consciences of researchers. Rather, we need to develop and strengthen professional models of regulation which emphasise education, training and mutual accountability. We conclude the paper with a number of suggestions about how such professional models might be implemented. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Informed consent is a concept which attempts to capture and convey what is regarded as the appropriate relationship between researcher and research participant. Definitions have traditionally emphasised respect for autonomy and the right to self-determination of the individual. However, the meaning of informed consent and the values on which it is based are grounded in society and the practicalities of social relationships. As society changes, so too do the meaning and practice of informed consent. In this paper, we trace the ways in which the meaning and practice of informed consent has changed over the last 35 years with reference to four qualitative studies of parenting and children in the UK which we have undertaken at different points in our research careers. We focus in particular on the shifting boundaries between the professional and personal, and changing expressions of agency and power in a context of heightened perceptions of risk in everyday life. We also discuss developments in information and communication technologies as a factor in changing both the formal requirements for and the situated practicalities of obtaining informed consent. We conclude by considering the implications for informed consent of both increasing bureaucratic regulation and increasingly sophisticated information and communication technologies and suggest strategies for rethinking and managing ‘consent’ in qualitative research practice. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]