When Ethics Becomes Unethical: An Autoethnographic Account of Gaining Ethics Approval to Conduct Ethnography in a Healthcare Setting
Saved in:
| Title: | When Ethics Becomes Unethical: An Autoethnographic Account of Gaining Ethics Approval to Conduct Ethnography in a Healthcare Setting |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Jillian Schneidman (ORCID |
| Source: | Journal of Academic Ethics. 2025 23(3):815-823. |
| Availability: | BioMed Central, Ltd. Available from: Springer Nature. 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-348-4505; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://www.springer.com/gp/biomedical-sciences |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 9 |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Descriptive |
| Descriptors: | Ethics, Ethnography, Health Services, Social Science Research, Field Studies, Administrative Organization, Research Administration, Accountability |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10805-024-09574-z |
| ISSN: | 1570-1727 1572-8544 |
| Abstract: | Many ethnographic researchers have raised concerns over the potential impacts that the institutionalization of ethics review boards can have on social science research, especially within healthcare settings. However, few articles to-date have documented how these norms and practices play out in actuality. This paper, therefore, uses autoethnography to provide an account of three ethical challenges that arose during my process of seeking ethics approval through institutional review boards to conduct ethnographic fieldwork in a healthcare setting. In doing so, I demonstrate how bureaucratic accountability took precedence over my research expertise, making the research that I initially set out to do inaccessible, questionable, and 'unethical', despite being carried out in accordance with the current standards governing research involving human participants and their data. I conclude with ways to move beyond this existing ethics structure towards a more collaborative approach between ethics boards, researchers, and research participants grounded within the realities of the field. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2025 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1485691 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | Many ethnographic researchers have raised concerns over the potential impacts that the institutionalization of ethics review boards can have on social science research, especially within healthcare settings. However, few articles to-date have documented how these norms and practices play out in actuality. This paper, therefore, uses autoethnography to provide an account of three ethical challenges that arose during my process of seeking ethics approval through institutional review boards to conduct ethnographic fieldwork in a healthcare setting. In doing so, I demonstrate how bureaucratic accountability took precedence over my research expertise, making the research that I initially set out to do inaccessible, questionable, and 'unethical', despite being carried out in accordance with the current standards governing research involving human participants and their data. I conclude with ways to move beyond this existing ethics structure towards a more collaborative approach between ethics boards, researchers, and research participants grounded within the realities of the field. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1570-1727 1572-8544 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10805-024-09574-z |
