Oeye Christine, Bjelland Anne Karen, Skorpen Aina
Stord/Haugesund University College, Hordaland, Norway.
Soc Sci Med. 2007 Dec;65(11):2296-306. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.07.016. Epub 2007 Aug 31.
Social scientists who employ participant observation methods in medical settings are often held accountable for their research methods, specifically in regard to medical research ethics. However, the medical research ethics tradition rubs uneasily against participant observation and the anthropological understanding of the research process. The underlying premise for considering research ethics in the current case is the notion of the vulnerability of psychiatric patients as a participant group. Based on this notion of vulnerability among psychiatric patients, this article discusses the epistemological grounds for vulnerability in anthropological and medical research ethics. The authors draw on their experience with the Regional Committee for Medical Research Ethics in Norway, and the consequences of the guidelines used for participant observation as a research method in a psychiatric hospital. Social science researchers are required to follow medical ethical guidelines, such as informed consent, the principle of voluntariness, and estimation of risks and benefits. Ethnographers have found these guidelines to be obstructive when doing social science research in a psychiatric hospital. The article suggests the need for reformulation of research guidelines for participant observation in medical settings.
在医疗环境中采用参与观察法的社会科学家,往往要对其研究方法负责,特别是在医学研究伦理方面。然而,医学研究伦理传统与参与观察以及对研究过程的人类学理解并不契合。在当前案例中考虑研究伦理的潜在前提是,将精神科患者作为一个参与群体来看待时其脆弱性的概念。基于精神科患者的这种脆弱性概念,本文探讨了人类学和医学研究伦理中脆弱性的认识论依据。作者借鉴了他们在挪威医学研究伦理区域委员会的经验,以及在一家精神病院将参与观察作为一种研究方法所使用的指导方针的后果。社会科学研究人员必须遵循医学伦理准则,如知情同意、自愿原则以及风险和益处评估。人种志学者发现在精神病院进行社会科学研究时,这些准则具有阻碍性。本文建议重新制定医疗环境中参与观察的研究指导方针。