Abstract
The focus of this article is the research-process of the study We did what we could; he was such a ‘nice’ baby. My experiences as a field researcher and «grounded theorist» will be described and discussed. The aim of the study was to generate knowledge about the ethical decision-making-processes nurses and physicians are faced with on a neonatal unit. A descriptive study design with field observations and in depth interviews was chosen. A total of 120 hours of field observations were made over a period of 10 months at a teaching hospital in Norway. In addition, 22 in depth interviews were made with registered nurses and physicians. A semi-structured interview guide was made and each interview was tape recorded and later transcribed. Strauss' & Glasers' qualitative, comparative method, Grounded Theory, was used to analyze the field observations and interviews. Nud.ist data program (Non-numerical Unstructured Data Indexing Searching and Theory-building) was used in analyzing the data. The findings seem to indicate that ethical decisions are somewhat ambivalent. Experience does not make these decisions easier. In situations of indecisiveness, decisions are based upon the sign-of-life of the babies. A tentative theoretical framework was discussed where the core variable seems to be ambivalence.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
