Anspach Renée R, Mizrachi Nissim
Department of Sociology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1382, USA.
Sociol Health Illn. 2006 Sep;28(6):713-31. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2006.00538.x.
Sociologists who do field work in medical settings face an intractable tension between their disciplinary field, which takes a critical perspective toward medicine, and their ethnographic field, which often includes physicians. This paper explores the ethical problems that result from the collision of the two fields. While in the field, ethnographers are forced to choose between sociology and their obligations to host members, as they decide whether to disclose their actual research agendas, whether to ask tough questions or to reveal their concerns, and whether to give advice. The tension persists when field workers leave the field to write, forcing them to choose between competing interpretations and to decide what to reveal or conceal in the interests of confidentiality. Through these moral choices about what to ask, record or present to the reader, ethnographers shape the academic field even as it shapes them.
在医疗环境中进行实地研究的社会学家,在其对医学持批判性视角的学科领域与通常包括医生在内的人种志研究领域之间,面临着一种难以解决的紧张关系。本文探讨了这两个领域碰撞所产生的伦理问题。在实地研究中,人种志研究者在决定是否披露其实际研究议程、是否提出尖锐问题或表达其关切以及是否提供建议时,被迫在社会学及其对东道主成员的义务之间做出选择。当实地工作者离开实地去撰写报告时,这种紧张关系依然存在,这迫使他们在相互冲突的解释之间做出选择,并决定为了保密起见该披露什么或隐瞒什么。通过这些关于询问什么、记录什么或向读者呈现什么的道德选择,人种志研究者塑造了学术领域,同时学术领域也塑造了他们。