In a follow-up study of adolescents with serious problems, the author experienced dilemmas involving satisfying standards of research and ethical guidelines. The guidelines aim to protect marginal and vulnerable groups based on a hypothesis about the best interests of the weak group. Research experience shows, however, that these regulations also prevent coming in contact with informants. During the project, informants were systematically asked their opinions about being contacted. Ethical guidelines for research are discussed in light of ethical theories and findings of the research. The conclusions are that research guidelines are shaped from “above” and that one consequence is a protectionist attitude not always serving needs of respondents. It is suggested that the establishment of ethical standards in research may be improved if done in dialogue with respondents.
Bing, J. (1991). Personvern i faresonen [The endangered right to privacy]. Oslo, Norway: Cappelen.
2.
Christians, C. G. (2000). Ethics and politics in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 133-155). London: Sage.
3.
Datafagligsekretariat (Norwegian Social Sciences Data Services). (1997). Forskning og personvern. Orientering om sentrale lovbestemmelser for forskeres bruk av persondata[Research on the rights of privacy: A guide to the laws governing the use of private information in research]. Bergen, Norway: Norsk samfunnsvitenskapelig datatjeneste.
4.
Den nasjonale forskningsetiske komite for samfunnsvitenskap og humaniora. (1999). Forskningsetiske retningslinjer for samfunnsvitenskap, jus og humaniora [National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and Humanities]. Oslo, Norway: Author.
5.
Denzin, N. K. (1997). Interpretive ethnography: Ethnographic practices for the 21st century. London: Sage.
6.
Edwards, R., & Mauthner, M. (2002). Ethics and feminist research: Theory and practice. In M. Mauthner, M. Birch, J. Jessop, & T. Miller (Eds.), Ethics in qualitative research (pp. 14-31). London: Sage.
7.
Føllesdal, A. (1995). Forskningsetikk—Moralfilosofiske perspektiver [Research ethics—Moral philosophical perspectives]. In D. Elgesem (Ed.), Seks innlegg om forskningsetikk i samfunnsvitenskap og humaniora (pp. 7-22). Oslo, Norway: Den nasjonale forskningsetiske komite for samfunnsvitenskap og humaniora.
8.
Habermas, J. (1999). Kommunikativ handling, moral og rett [Communicative action, morality and justice]. Oslo, Norway: Tano Aschehoug.
9.
Hare, J. (1981). Moral thinking: Its levels, methods and point. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
10.
Hatland, A. (1996). Hvor lett bør det være å reservere seg fra deltakelse i forskning? [How easy should it be to refrain from participation in research?]. In D. Elgesem & H. Storvik (Eds.), Forskning, personvern og samtykke (pp. 17-24). Oslo, Norway: De nasjonale forskningsetiske komiteer.
11.
Helgeland, I. M. (1989). En etterundersoekelse av ungdom i Buskerudprosjektet [Afollow-up study of adolescents from the Buskerud Project]. Oslo, Norway: Barnevernets utviklingssenter.
12.
Helgeland, I. M. (2001). Ungdom med atferdsvansker—Hvordan går det med dem som 30-åringer? En longitudinell studie [Adolescents with behavior problems—How well do they cope when they are in their thirties? A longitudinal study]. Oslo, Norway: Høgskolen i Oslo, Sosialforsk og Universitetet i Oslo, Det medisinske fakultet.
13.
Helgeland, I. M., & Waal, H. (1989). Kan vi hjelpe ungdom med atferdsvansker? [Can we help adolescents who have behavior problems?]. Tidsskrift for Den norske Lægeforening, 14, 1509-1512.
14.
Heller, J. (1966). Catch-22. New York: Modern Library.
15.
Johannessen, A. H. (1999). Løvetannbarn [Resilient children]. Oslo, Norway: Universitetet i Oslo.
16.
Johansen, K. J., & Vetlesen, A. J. (1996). Etikk—i historie og samtid [Ethics—Itsplace in history and in contemporary society]. Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget.
17.
Kelman, H. C. (1982). Ethical issues in different social methods. In T. L. Beauchamp, R. R. Faden, J. R. J. Wallace, & L. Walters (Eds.), Ethical issues in social science research (pp. 40-98). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
18.
Pinkard, T. (1982). Invasions of privacy in social science research. In T. L. Beauchamp, R. R. Faden, J. R. J. Wallace, & L. Walters (Eds.), Ethical issues in social science research (pp. 257-277). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
19.
Sevenhuijsen, S. (1998). Citizenship and the ethics of care: Feminist considerations on justice, morality and politics. London: Routledge.
20.
Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. London: Zed Books.
21.
Sosialdepartementet. (1985). NOU 1985: 3 Tiltak for ungdom med atferdsvansker: Vi åpner for andre løsninger [Norwegian Ministry of Social Affairs, White Paper 1985: 3 Programs for adolescents with behavior problems: Openings for a variety of solutions]. Oslo, Norway: Ministry of Social Affairs.
22.
Tranøy, K. E. (1986). Vitenskapen, samfunnsform og livsform [Science, the organization of society and how we live our lives]. Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget.
23.
Waal, H., & Helgeland, I. M. (1989). Straff, opplæring, oppdragelse og behandling [Punishment, education, upbringing and treatment]. Tidsskrift for Den norske Lægeforening, 14, 1513-1516.
