The Human Subjects Protection Process: A Subjective View

By Delva, Jorge | Social Work, April 2007 | Go to article overview

The Human Subjects Protection Process: A Subjective View


Delva, Jorge, Social Work


Currently, I am preparing to conduct a longitudinal study in another country to prospectively identify factors that may place pre-adolescents and adolescents at higher or lower risk of drug involvement. One of the concerns my colleagues and I share is whether to inform parents if a youth participant is consuming substances, particularly if a parent asks. If this were a study of risk factors associated with the incidence of cancer, we would not hesitate to inform the parent about a diagnosis. However, for now, we have resolved that we will not share any information with the parent because this would violate confidentiality, the exception being if the child and/or parent reports the child has experienced physical or sexual abuse, and this is clearly communicated to the participants in the consent process. We have promised protection of confidentiality to adolescent participants so that we may obtain more reliable and valid information.

Confidentiality is one of many areas of concern that researchers like me constantly negotiate as we make inquiries about social phenomena. The process of protecting the rights and welfare of human research subjects recruited to participate in research activities is fraught with complexities and dilemmas. I have served as a member of the institutional review board ORB) at two universities, altogether serving for more than seven years in this capacity. I have come to appreciate the role that these boards play in helping investigators more carefully think through the process of protecting study participants. Please note that my generally positive experience with the IRB process is not an indication that I fully endorse everything that IRBs do or a suggestion that the review process is flawless.

It has been my experience that researchers care greatly about informing potential study participants of the study's purpose and activities. Likewise, researchers take great pains to ensure no one is harmed as a result of his or her participation. There are numerous challenges, however, to ensure both fidelity of research and protection of the participant. In my prospective study, for example, another concern besides whether we should inform parents about their child's substance use is what to do if we learn that a child is being pressured to use drugs, has elevated depressive or anxiety symptomatology, or displays heightened aggression or other signs of behavioral problems. Should the parent be informed under these circumstances? Should we design an intervention to help the child decide that it would be a good idea to discuss this information with his or her parent or another adult? It is not uncommon for researchers to forget to identify all potential threats to confidentiality and potential harm that may result from participation in the study.

Consent is another area that warrants close inspection. Some researchers could more clearly communicate to the participant that he or she may choose not to participate, can terminate participation at any time, or may choose not to answer any questions if he or she so desires. Also, as important as we might think our studies are, I believe we can all exercise some restraint when indicating that the results of the study will serve to improve programs, services, or policies because we may inadvertently be promising too much. In all these aspects, and many more, I strongly believe that IRBs play a critical role in helping researchers successfully navigate the ethical aspects of the study including human subjects protection issues. That these boards include researchers and nonresearchers, academicians and nonacademicians, and individuals from the community also serves to bring a rich and diverse perspective on human subjects protection issues.

IRBs, too, have their downside. Although well intended, some newer IRB rules and regulations run the risk of making it impossible for some studies to be conducted. My experience says that most IRB members can be educated about the study and a positive resolution to the identified concerns can be reached through a dialogue among all stakeholders. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

The Human Subjects Protection Process: A Subjective View
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Author Advanced search

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.