This article is meant to describe and analyze some of the ethical difficulties encountered in a pilot research on treatment decisions of patients with chronic viral hepatitis C infection in Romania. It departs from an overview of the main ethics codes, and it shows that social health research on patients falls in between institutional codes of ethics. Furthermore, the article moves on to analyze so-called “important moments” of empirical research, such as the implementation of the ethical protocol, dealing with informal payments and with information on shady actions, as well as requests of information from interviewed patients and deciding when and if to breach confidentiality. In an attempt to evaluate the ad hoc solutions found in the field, the concluding remarks discuss these issues at the threshold of theory and practice.
American Psychological Association. (2015, July10). Press release and recommended actions: Independent review cites collusion among APA individuals and defense department officials in policy on interrogation techniques. Press Releases of the American Psychological Association. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2015/07/independent-review-release.aspx
3.
American Sociological Association. (1999). Code of ethics: Policies and procedures of the ASA committee on professional ethics. Washington, DC: American Sociological Association.
4.
BartensJ. (2004). If a threat of violence is presented, when does the law require family mediators to breach confidentiality?Family Court Review, 42, 641-654.
5.
BeecherH. K. (1966). Ethics and clinical research. The New England Journal of Medicine, 274, 1354-1360.
BrummelB. J.GunsalusC. K.AndersonK. L.LouiM. C. (2010). Development of role-play scenarios for teaching responsible conduct of research. Science and Engineering Ethics, 16, 573-589.
9.
BrymanA. (2008). Social research methods (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
10.
CarrollJ. S.JohnsonE. J. (1990). Decision research: A field guide (Applied Social Research Methods) (BickmanL., Ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
11.
CeglowskiD. (2000). Research as relationship. Qualitative Inquiry, 6(3), 88-103.
CharmazK. (2014). Grounded theory in global perspective: Reviews by international researchers. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(9), 1074-1084.
14.
CherecheşR.UngureanuM.RusI.BabaC. (2011, February). Informal payments in the health care system—Research, media and policy. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Studies, E(32), 5-14.
15.
CliftK. E.HalversonC. M. E.FiksdalA. S.KumbamuA.SharpR. R.McCormickJ. B. (2015). Patients’ views’ on incidental findings from clinical exome sequencing. Applied & Translational Genomics, 4, 38-43.
16.
CoffeyA.AtkinsonP. (1996). Concepts and coding. In CoffeyA.AtkinsonP. (Eds.), Making sense of qualitative data (pp. 26-53). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
17.
CokerR.McKeeM. (2001). Ethical approval for health research in central and eastern Europe: An international survey. Clinical Medicine, 1, 197-199. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11446614
18.
ColesJ.AstburyJ.DartnallE.LimjerwalaS. (2014). A qualitative exploration of researcher trauma and researchers’ responses to investigating sexual violence. Violence Against Women, 20, 95-117.
Council of Europe. (1997). Oviendo convention for the protection of human rights and dignity of the human being with regard to the applications of biology and medicine: Convention on human rights and biomedicine. European Treaty Series, 164. Retrieved from http://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/rms/090000168007cf98
21.
CramerS. C.WuJ.HansonJ. A.NouriS.KarnaniD.ChuangT. M.LeV. (2011). A system for addressing incidental findings in neuroimagining research. NeuroImage, 55, 1020-1023.
22.
DeanA.VossD. (1999). Design and analysis of experiments. G3 (Bethesda, Md.) (Vol. 4). New York, NY: Springer.
23.
Department of Homeland Security, Department of Agriculture, Department of Energy, Department of Commerce, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Social Security Administration, . . . Department of Transportation. (2017). Federal policy for the protection of human subjects. Federal Register, 82, 7149-7274. Retrieved from https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2017-01-19/pdf/2017-01058.pdf
24.
Dickson-SwiftV.JamesE. L.KippenS.LiamputtongP. (2009). Researching sensitive topics: Qualitative research as emotion work. Qualitative Research, 9, 61-79. doi:10.1177/1468794108098031
25.
EllisC. (2007). Telling secrets, revealing lives: Relational ethics in research with intimate others. Qualitative Inquiry, 13, 3-29. doi:10.1177/1077800406294947
26.
EmanuelE. J.WendlerD.GradyC. (2008). An ethical framework for biomedical research. In EmanuelE. J.GradyC.CrouchR. A.LieR. K.MillerF. G.WendlerD. (Eds.), The Oxford textbook of clinical research ethics (pp. 123-135). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
27.
emeralde.CarpenterL. (2015). Vulnerability and emotions in research: Risks, dilemmas, and doubts. Qualitative Inquiry, 21, 741-750. doi:10.1177/1077800414566688
GottliebM. C. (1993). Avoiding exploitive dual relationships: A decision-making model. Psychotherapy, 30, 41-48.
31.
GuilleminM.GillamL. (2004). Ethics, reflexivity, and “ethically important moments” in research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10, 261-280. doi:10.1177/1077800403262360
32.
GuilleminM.GillamL.RosenthalD.BolithoA. (2010). Resources employed by health researchers to ensure ethical research practice. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: An International Journal, 5(2), 21-34. doi:10.1525/jer.2010.5.2.21
33.
GurzawskaA. (2015). Ethics assessment in different fields: Social sciences (Report for the “Stakeholders Acting Together on the Ethical Impact Assessment of Research and Innovation” project).Available online: http://satoriproject.eu/media/2.d-Social-Sciences.pdf
34.
HaidtJ. (2013). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
35.
HallD. E.HanusaB. H.LingB. S.StoneR. A.SwitzerG. E.FineM. J.ArnoldR. M. (2015). Using the IRB researcher assessment tool to guide quality improvement. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 10, 460-469. doi:10.1177/1556264615612195
36.
HalversonG.BrownleeK. (2010). Managing ethical considerations around dual relationships in small rural and remote Canadian communities. International Social Work, 53, 247-260.
37.
HeumannM.FriedesA.CassakL.WrightW.JoshiE. (2013). The world of whistleblowing. Public Integrity, 16, 25-52.
38.
HeylS. B. (2002). Ethnographic interviewing. In AtkinsonP.CoeyA.DelamontS.LoandJ.LoandL. (Eds.), Handbook of ethnography (pp. 369-383). London, England: Sage.
39.
HiriscauI.Stingelin-GilesN.StadlerC.SchmeckK.Reiter-TheilS. (2014). A right to confidentiality or a duty to disclose? Ethical guidance for conducting prevention research with children and adolescents. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 23, 409-416.
40.
HiriscauI. E.Stingelin-GilesN.Reiter-TheilS. (2013). Ethical issues in research with minors. Orientation by codes and many open questions. Revista Romana De Bioetica, 11(3), 74-83. Retrieved from http://www.bioetica.ro/index.php/arhiva-bioetica/article/view/658
41.
HughesJ.SheehanM. (2010). European textbook on ethics in research. Brussels: European Commission.
Institute of Sociology of the Romanian Academy. (2012). Codul de Etica, Deontologie si Integritate Profesionala al Cercetatorilor [Researcher’s Code of Ethics, Deonthology and Professional Integrity]. Retrieved from http://www.insoc.ro/institut/cod_etica.php
IorgaM. (2011). Ethics by all means: Thinking ethics through university courses. Studia UBB Philosophia, 56, 173-182.
46.
IttenbachR.F.SenftE.C.HuangG.CorsmoJ.J.SieberJ.E. (2015). Readability and understanding of informed consent among participants with low incomes: A preliminary report. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics10(5), 444-448.
47.
KeatsD. M. (2001). Interviewing: A practical guide for students and professionals. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
48.
KemmisS.McTaggartR.NixonR. (2014). The action research planner: Doing participatory action research. Singapore: Springer.
LandmanM. (2006). Getting quality in qualitative research: A short introduction to feminist methodology and methods. The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 65, 429-433. doi:10.1017/S0029665106005180
51.
LedgerA. (2010). Exploring multiple identities as a health care ethnographer. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 9, 291-304.
52.
LincolnY. S.TierneyW. G. (2004). Qualitative research and institutional review boards. Qualitative Inquiry, 10, 219-234. doi:10.1177/1077800403262361
53.
MalseedJ. (1987). Straw men: A note on Ann Oakley’s treatment of textbook prescriptions for interviewing. Sociology, 21, 629-631.
54.
MamotteN.WassenaarD. R. (2009). Ethics review in a developing Country: A survey of South African social scientists’ experiences. Journal of Empirical Research in Human Research Ethics, 4(4), 69-78.
55.
MijaljicaG. (2014). Medical ethics, bioethics and research ethics education perspectives in South East Europe in graduate medical education. Science and Engineering Ethics, 20, 237-247.
56.
MilesB. M.HubermanA. M. (1994). An expanded sources book: Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
57.
Ministerul Educației Cercetării și Tineretului Autoritatea Națională pentru Cercetare Științifică Consiliul Național de Etică. (2007). Codul General de Etică în Cercetarea Științifică [General Code of Ethics for Scientific Research]. Retrieved from http://www.academiaromana.ro/consiliuCercetare/pag_consCoord_act.htm
58.
MoldovanA.Van de WalleS. (2013). Gifts or bribes? Attitudes on informal payments in Romanian health care. Public Integrity, 15, 385-402. doi:10.2753/PIN1099-9922150404
59.
OakleyA. (1998). Gender, methodology and people’s ways of knowing: Some problems with feminism and the paradigm debate in social science. Sociology, 32, 707-731.
60.
PaolettiI. (2014). Ethics and the social dimension of research activities. Human Studies, 37, 257-277. doi:10.1007/s10746-013-9299-4
61.
Quinn PattonM. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Research Ethics Committee of the University of Bucharest. (2016). Regulamentul de Organizare si Functionare a Comisiei de Etica a Cercetarii [Rules of Organization and operation of the Committee for Research Ethics]. Bucharest, Romania. Retrieved from http://cometc.unibuc.ro/downloads/regulament-cec.pdf
Romanian Parliament. Legea nr. 206/2004 privind buna conduită în dezvoltarea științifică și dezvolatrea tehnologică și inovare. (2004). Bucharest: Monitorul Oficial al României. Retrieved from http://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/52457
68.
RussellH. B. (1988). Research methods in cultural anthropology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
69.
SawyerS.PrescottD. (2011). Boundaries and dual relationships. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 23, 365-380.
70.
SchreierM. (2011a). Building a coding frame. In SchreierM. (Ed.), Qualitative content analysis in practice (pp. 80-106). London, England: Sage.
71.
SchreierM. (2011b). Strategies for building a data-driven coding frame. In SchreierM. (Ed.), Qualitative content analysis in practice (pp. 107-125). London, England: Sage.
72.
SieberJ. E. (2012). Witnesses to research wrongdoing. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 7(5), 3-14.
73.
SinghS.WassenaarD. R. (2016). Contextualizing the role of the gatekeeper in social science research. South African Journal of Bioethics & Law, 9, 42-46.
StepurkoT.PavlovaM.GrygaI.GrootW. (2013). Informal payments for health care services—Corruption or gratitude? A study on public attitudes, perceptions and opinions in six Central and Eastern European countries. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 46, 419-431.
Universitatea de Medicină şi Farmacie Carol Davila Bucuresti. (2012). Carta Universităţii de Medicină şi Farmacie Carol Davila Bucuresti. [Carta of the University of Medicine and Pharmacy, “Carol Davila”, Bucharest]. Romania. Retrieved from http://observator.forhe.ro/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Carta_UMF.pdf
WassenaarD. R.MamotteN. (2012). Ethical issues and ethics reviews in social science research. In The Oxford handbook of international psychological ethics. Oxford Handbooks Online. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199739165.013.0019
85.
WatsonD. (2015). Research ethics and integrity for social scientists. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 38, 335-336.
YanosP. T.HopperK. (2008). On “false, collusive objectification”: Becoming attuned to self-censorship, performance and interviewer biases in qualitative interviewing. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11, 229-237. doi:10.1080/13645570701605756
