Feminist Research Ethics, Informed Consent, and Potential Harms

Feminist research is fraught with ethical dilemmas, some of which concern informed consent and the possibility of potential harms to respondents. I review several dilemmas addressed in the literature and how feminist researchers resolved the issues. I also look at the National Association of Social Workers‘ Code of Ethics and how the concepts of dual relationships and boundaries in social work practice may offer helpful guidelines to feminist researchers. The conduct of feminist research is a common practice that is fraught with ethical dilemmas. If one takes the tenets of feminist research seriously, one is attempting to meet a very high ethical standard, and these attempts aren‘t always supported by one‘s peers or the processes of research. This paper explores a particular area of feminist research that has been discussed in the literature: informed consent. There are many ways to define informed consent, and all researchers have to obtain it, but determining whether or not consent is truly informed can be an ethical gray area. I explore the writings of several feminist scholars who have struggled with this issue in practice, and then discusses some of the ways feminist researchers have chosen to address informed consent. The paper then turns to some potential harms identified by feminist researchers which have resulted from their research, in spite of obtaining informed consent. I argue that feminist researchers could use some guidelines in this area, and that the National Association of Social Workers‘ (NASW) Code of Ethics, particularly in relation to boundaries and dual relationships, may provide some assistance in making research decisions which minimize potential harms. Feminist Research Feminist social science research methods have been discussed for years, and there is an ongoing question of whether there is such a thing as ―feminist methodology.‖ Some argue that methodology is methodology (Chafetz, 2004), or that there isn‘t a ―distinctive feminist method of research‖ (Harding, 1987, p. 456). Fonow and Cook, on the other hand, believe that there is a feminist methodology, which they state ―involves the description, explanation, and justification of techniques used in feminist research and is an abstract classification that refers to a variety of methodological stances, conceptual approaches, and research strategies‖ (2005, p. 2213). Harding stated that the distinctive features of the best feminist research weren‘t going to be found by looking at research methods (1987). Harding‘s definition of feminist research focuses on three characteristics: women‘s experience as empirical and theoretical resources; research of problems which concern women and which is therefore done for women; and the placement and recognition of the researcher as a subject who exists in the same moment as the subject matter she is researching (Harding, 1987). Feminist research, in general, has varying definitions. According to Guimaraes (2007), ―many propose that–whatever the method employed–what makes research feminist‘ is, in part, an underlying research ethic of McCormick 23 The Hilltop Review, Winter 2012 24 Feminist Research Ethics The Hilltop Review, Winter 2012 integrity‘ and responsibility‘ in the research process‖ (p. 149). Fonow and Cook coedited the anthology, Beyond Methodology: Feminist Scholarship as Lived Research in 1991, in which they attempted to ―capture the dilemmas feminists faced at each step of the research process‖ (2005, p. 2212). Their conception of a feminist methodology offers these guiding principles for researchers: to be reflexively aware of the significance of gender in their work; to help raise consciousness around issues; to challenge the idea that objectivity is obtainable in research; to consider the ethical implication of their research and the recognition of the potential for their respondents to be exploited; and to use their work to advance women‘s empowerment (Fonow & Cook, 2005, p. 2213). DeVault believes feminist researchers ―are united through various efforts to include women‘s lives and concerns in accounts of society, to minimize the harms of research, and to support changes that will improve women‘s status‖ (1996, p. 29) These different approaches to feminist research and methods cover most of the main tenets of feminist research. There is clearly a concern for reflexivity and placing the researcher in the same world as those being researched. There is a need for the work being done to be political in some way—to contribute to the transformation of society in a way that is beneficial to oppressed persons. There is a concern that the research be ethical, in that it not cause harm to those being researched, and that it give voice to the voiceless. These are high standards to meet, and yet many researchers use these guidelines in conducting their work. Feminists conducting social science research have a tendency to choose methods which enable them to answer the questions they pose in a way that is true to their feminist values. Within this feminist approach to research, I look at how the ―underlying research ethic‖ named by Guimaraes (2007) has an impact upon research and how it is addressed by feminist social science researchers in practice. Given the concern for ethical research practice, I review some ethical dilemmas being faced by feminist social science researchers in regard to informed consent. How are they are being reflexive about the ethical issues they face, and how they are able to resolve ethical dilemmas in ways that still meet the requirements of feminist research? Informed Consent One of the first ethical questions feminist researchers face is that of informed consent. Obtaining meaningful informed consent can become problematic for the research process. One area in which this is prevalent in social science research concerns the study of vulnerable populations, which may include children, young women who are being hospitalized for treatment of some sort, homeless youth, and people who are incarcerated, for example. All of these populations can be of interest to social scientists, and arguments can be made for the importance of research on these populations in terms of contributions to knowledge. Obtaining informed consent in these cases, however, is not a direct process. According to The Belmont Report, the main concern of informed consent has to deal with ―respect for persons,‖ which ―requires that subjects, to the degree that they are capable, be given the opportunity to choose what shall or shall not happen to them‖ (National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, 1979, Part C, Section 1). All researchers have to obtain informed consent before embarking upon their research, but determining whether or not consent is truly informed can be difficult. Providing information to respondents about one‘s research is a fairly straightforward endeavor, although one still needs to make sure it is provided in terms which the respondent can understand. Comprehension of the research is more problematic. The person may understand what is being put forward to them, but may not understand the implications of granting the request. For example, some may not fully understand how they may be impacted, even if