Reflecting on my experience of leading several qualitative research projects to investigate ‘sensitive’ topics with potentially ‘vulnerable’ participants, this paper considers the impact and consequences of increased ethical regulation in relation to my own research field and social research more generally. It argues that extending ethical regulation threatens social research in general, and specifically, threatens the study of ‘sensitive’ topics with ‘vulnerable’ populations. The consequences of increased ethical regulation may contradict its intention and place ‘vulnerable’ participants at greater risk than ‘sensitive’ research undertaken with such groups in earlier historical periods. The paper urges social researchers to act collectively, to engage with ethical regulatory regimes in order to challenge the threats they pose to scholarship, and by doing so, defend the value of social research for advancing knowledge so that our scholarship might better serve the populations we study.
ADLERP. (1993) Wheeling and Dealing: An Ethnography of an Upper-Level Drug Dealing and Smuggling Community.New York, Colombia University Press.
2.
ALDREDR. (2008). Managing risk and regulation within new local ‘health economies’: The case of LIFT (Local Improvement Finance Trust).Sociology, 42, (5) pp. 887-903 doi: 10.1177/0038038508094568. [doi: 10.1177/0038038508094568]
BODENR., EpsteinD., and LatimerJ. (2009). Accounting for ethos or programmes for conduct? The brave new world of research ethics committees.The Sociological Review, 57, (4) pp. 728-49 doi: 10.1111/j.1467-954X2009.01869.x [doi: 10.1111/j.1467-954X.2009.01869.x]
5.
BRANNENJ. (1988). The study of sensitive topics.The Sociological Review, 36, pp. 552-63.
BRIGGSD. (2009) ‘Facing Fear in the Field: Visual Ethnographic Methods in Drug-Using Locations’, in WellerS., and CaballeroC. (Eds.), Up Close and Personal: Relationships and Emotions Within and Through Research, Families and Social Capital Research Group, London, LSBU
8.
COOMBERR. (2002). Signing your life away: Why research ethics committees shouldn't always require written confirmation that participants in research have been informed of the aims of a study and their rights - the case of criminal populations.Sociological Research Online, 7 (1) http://www.socresonline.org.uk/7/1/coomber.html
9.
CORDENA. (1996). Writing about Poverty: Ethical Dilemmas. In DeanH. (ed.) Ethics and social policy research, 8-20Luton, University of Luton in Association with the Social Policy Association
10.
DEANH., and MelroseM. (1996) ‘Unravelling Citizenship: The significance of social security benefit fraud’, Critical Social Policy48(16) pp. 3-32 [doi: 10.1177/026101839601604801]
11.
DEANH., and MelroseM. (1997) Manageable Discord: Fraud and Resistance in the Social Security System’, Social Policy and Administration31(2) pp. 103-118. [doi: 10.1111/1467-9515.00043]
12.
DEANH., and MelroseM. (1999) ‘Easy Pickings or Hard Profession?’ in DeanH. (ed.) Begging Questions: Street Level Economic Activity and Social Policy Failure, Bristol, The Policy Press.
13.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH (2001) Research governance framework for health and social care.London, Department of Health.
14.
DINGWALLR. (2006). Confronting the anti-democrats: The unethical nature of ethical regulation in social science.Medical Sociology Online, 1, http://www.medicalsociologyonline.org
FARBEROWN. (1963). Introduction. in FarberowN. (ed.) Taboo Topics.New York, Atherton Press.
18.
FERDINANDJ., PearsonG., RoweM., and WorthingtonF. (2007). A different kind of ethics.Ethnography, 8, (4) pp. 519-43doi: 10.1177/1466138107083566 [doi: 10.1177/1466138107083566]
19.
FIRMINC. (2010) A study into the impact of serious youth and gang violence on women and girls., London, ROTA.
20.
HAGGERTYK. (2004). Ethics creep: governing social science research in the name of ethics.Qualitative Sociology, 27, (4) pp. 391-414. doi: 10.1023/B:QUAS.0000049239.15922.a3 [doi: 10.1023/B:QUAS.0000049239.15922.a3]
21.
HAMMERSLEYM. (2006). Are ethics committees ethical?Qualitative Researcher, 2, pp. 4-10.
22.
HAMMERSLEYM. (2009). Against the ethicists: On the evils of ethical regulation.International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 12, (3) pp. 211-225 doi: 10.1080/13645570802170288. [doi: 10.1080/13645570802170288]
23.
HAMMERSLEYM. (2010). Creeping ethical regulation and the strangling of research.Sociological Research Online, 15, (4) 16 < http://www.socresonline.org.uk/15/4/16.html> doi: 10.5153/sro.2255.
24.
HOLMWOODJ. (2010). Research ethics committees (RECs) and the creaking piers of peer review.Sociological Research Online, 15, (4) 14 doi: 10.5153/sro.2247.http://www.socresonline.co.uk/15/4/14.html [doi: 10.5153/sro.2247]
25.
HURDLEYR. (2010). In the picture or off the wall? Ethical regulation, research habitus and unpeopled ethnography.Qualitative Inquiry, 16, (6) pp. 517-28 doi: 10.1177/1077800410370676. [doi: 10.1177/1077800410370676]
26.
KENTJ., WilliamsonE., GoodenoughT., and AshcroftR. (2002). Social science gets the ethics treatment: research governance and ethical review.Sociological Research Online, 7, (4) http://www.socresonline.org.uk/7/4/williamson.html
27.
LEER. (1993) Doing research on sensitive topics., London, Sage.
28.
MANNK. (1996). Who are you looking at? Voyeurs, narks and do-gooders. in DeanH., (ed.) Ethics and social policy research, (63-71)Luton, University of Luton in Association with the Social Policy Association
29.
MELROSEM. (1996) ‘Enticing Subjects and Disembodied Objects’, in DeanH. (Ed.), Ethics and Social Policy Research, University of Luton Press in association with the Social Policy Association.
30.
MELROSEM. (1999) ‘Word from the Street: Reflections on the perils, pains and gender dynamics of researching begging in contemporary Britain’, in DeanH. (Ed.), Begging Questions: Street level economic activity and social policy failure, Bristol, The Policy Press.
31.
MELROSEM. (2000) Fixing It? Young people, drugs and disadvantage, Lyme Regis, Russell House Publishing.
32.
MELROSEM. (2002) ‘Labour Pains: Some considerations on the difficulties of researching juvenile prostitution’International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Theory and Practice Vol. 5(4) pp. 333-351.
33.
MELROSEM. (2010) ‘What's Love Got to Do With It? Theorising Young People's Involvement in Prostitution’, Youth and Policy Special Edition, No. 104.
34.
MELROSEM. (forthcoming) ‘Twenty-First Century Party People: Models of Young People's Involvement in Commercial Sex Markets in the Millennium’.
35.
MELROSEM. with BarrettD. (2004) (Eds.) Anchors in Floating Lives: Interventions with Young People Sexually Abused through Prostitution, Lyme Regis, Russell House Publishing.
36.
MELROSEM., BarrettD., and BrodieI. (1999) One Way Street? Retrospectives on Childhood Prostitution, London, The Children's Society.
37.
MELROSEM., with TurnerP., PittsJ., and BarrettD. (2007) Heavy Cannabis Use, Vulnerability and Youth Transitions, Final Report, Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
REEDK. (2007). Bureaucracy and beyond: The impact of ethics and governance procedures on health research in the social sciences.Sociological Research Online, 12, (5) http://www.socresonline.org.uk/12/5/18/html> doi: 10.5153/sro.1627. [doi: 10.5153/sro.1627]
40.
REEDK. (2010). The spectre of research ethics and governance and the ESRC's 2010 FRE: Nowhere left to hide?Sociological Research Online, 15, (4) 17http://www.socresonline.org.uk/15/4/17.html doi: 10.5153/sro.2253. [doi: 10.5153/sro.2253]
41.
RENZETTIC., and LeeR. (1993) Researching sensitive topics., London, Pluto.
SCOTTS. (1998). Here be dragons: researching the unbelievable, hearing the unthinkable: a feminist sociologist in unchartered territory.Sociological Research Online, 3, (3) http://www.socresonline.org.uk/3/3/1.html [doi: 10.5153/sro.189]
44.
SIEBERJ. (1993). The ethics and politics of social research. In RenzettiC., and LeeR., (eds.) Researching sensitive topics, Pluto, London.
45.
SIEBERJ., and StanleyB. (1988). Ethical and professional dimensions of socially sensitive research.American Psychologist, 43, pp. 49-55. [doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.43.1.49]
46.
STANLEYL., and WiseS. (2010). The ESRC's 2010 framework for research ethics: fit for research purpose?Sociological Research Online, 15, (4) 12http://www.socresonline.org.uk/15/4/12.html doi: 10.5153/sro.2265 [doi: 10.5153/sro.2265]
VAN TEIJLINGENE. (2006). Reply to Robert Dingwall's plenary ‘confronting the anti-democrats: The unethical nature of ethical regulation in social science’.Medical Sociology Online, 1, http://www.medicalsociologyonline.org
51.
WHYTEW. (1943) Street corner society: The social structure of an Italian slum.Chicago, University of Chicago Press
