Abstract
In the 1950s there was public outcry about the number of children being trapped and suffocating within refrigerators – often in garbage dumps. This sounds absurd, but we have to remember that unlike modern fridges old fridges didn’t use weak magnetic seals to close, they instead used an array of catches and handles to ensure that the cold stayed in, and as such they were somewhat more difficult to escape from. While there was general consensus that this was problematic, there were several competing ideas for how they should be replaced.
So research was proposed to study the behaviour of young children in a situation simulating entrapment in refrigerators in order to develop standards for inside-releasing devices. 1 At the time the research was not reviewed by a research ethics committee – but let us suppose counter factually it comes in front of your committee.
The researchers are proposing to ask parents if they would be happy to involve their children in research on public safety. They will invite mothers to bring their children (ages 2−5 years) to them. They then intend to ask the mother some demographic questions and lure the child away for a ‘game’ (actually an intelligence test, which the parents know about but the child doesn’t). Once the ‘game’ is completed they will escort the child into the next room where there is a large wooden box (to simulate a refrigerator) with a movie screen playing cartoons in it. The child is expected to investigate the box and when they go inside the researcher will slam the door closed behind them. At this point the cartoon will stop and the inside of the box will be pitch black. There are video cameras in the box so that the child will be under constant observation and at any sign of significant distress they will be released immediately. If they don’t make their own way out (the door is not locked but only sealed with a magnetic seal) they will be released after 5 minutes. Once the child is released they will get to watch the end of the cartoon, or if they are significantly distressed and this doesn’t calm they will be swiftly reunited with their mother.
The researchers are asking the parents to bring the children back in six months and then a year for a psychological assessment and are intending to ask the parents to contact them if there is any indication of trauma as a result of the research, for example if the children have bad dreams about enclosed spaces.
They recognize the possibility of psychological harm here, but argue that this research needs to be done using actual children and without their knowing participation since they needed to know how children will react in a ‘natural’ situation rather than one where they were trying to perform.
Questions:
What ethical issues does this case raise?
If your committee was considering this piece of research, how do you think you would decide?
What changes if any would you require?