This group addresses ethical issues in conducting research with alleged, suspected, or convicted perpetrators of child maltreatment including obligations to report and immunity.
Research with Alleged or Convicted Perpetrators of Child Maltrea
Research with Alleged or Convicted Perpetrators of Child Maltreatment
Summary
The major issues that were identified when conducting research on perpetrators of abuse, suspected, alleged, or convicted were:
1) obtaining informed consent versus the use of deception or distraction,
2) the duty to report suspected or known abuse versus maintaining confidentiality, and
3) using immunity from disclosure to gain new knowledge.
The recommendations of the group were that:
1) all perpetrators, suspected, alleged, or convicted, should hold the same general rights of all research subjects to give informed consent based on full disclosure of the research. However, there may be cases in which the benefits of the research are determined to outweigh the harm, and deception or immunity from disclosure could be utilized if approved by an REB/IRB. This includes cases in which a child or youth is the suspected, alleged, or known perpetrator; consent would need to be signed by the parent or legal guardian and assent obtained from the child.
2) The duty to report suspected abuse versus maintaining confidentiality in research continues to be discussed in the field with strong justifications cited by researchers on both sides of the question; the consensus of this group was that the duty to report, both ethically and legally, overrides maintaining confidentiality; however, subjects should be fully informed about the researcher’s legal duty to report suspected abuse as part of the informed consent process. In limited cases in which the benefits of the research significantly outweigh the harm, exceptions to this recommendation could be made with REB/IRB approval, utilizing a certification of confidentiality (in Canada).
3) There are circumstances in which immunity from disclosure or prosecution could be granted through the REB/IRB process in order to increase enrollment, obtain new knowledge, confirm previous information, or increase the accuracy of the information. However, there are significant barriers to utilizing this approach, including legal restrictions and the known inaccuracy of perpetrators’ self reports.
4) A North American Advisory Board on Ethics in Research on Maltreatment, composed of professionals conducting research in child maltreatment and other professionals experienced in REB/IRB requirements, is established to consult with individual researchers or REB/IRBs to address research questions or concerns in this highly sensitive area of research.
Research with Alleged or Convicted Perpetrators of Child Maltreatment
Summary
The major issues that were identified when conducting research on perpetrators of abuse, suspected, alleged, or convicted were:
1) obtaining informed consent versus the use of deception or distraction,
2) the duty to report suspected or known abuse versus maintaining confidentiality, and
3) using immunity from disclosure to gain new knowledge.
The recommendations of the group were that:
1) all perpetrators, suspected, alleged, or convicted, should hold the same general rights of all research subjects to give informed consent based on full disclosure of the research. However, there may be cases in which the benefits of the research are determined to outweigh the harm, and deception or immunity from disclosure could be utilized if approved by an REB/IRB. This includes cases in which a child or youth is the suspected, alleged, or known perpetrator; consent would need to be signed by the parent or legal guardian and assent obtained from the child.
2) The duty to report suspected abuse versus maintaining confidentiality in research continues to be discussed in the field with strong justifications cited by researchers on both sides of the question; the consensus of this group was that the duty to report, both ethically and legally, overrides maintaining confidentiality; however, subjects should be fully informed about the researcher’s legal duty to report suspected abuse as part of the informed consent process. In limited cases in which the benefits of the research significantly outweigh the harm, exceptions to this recommendation could be made with REB/IRB approval, utilizing a certification of confidentiality (in Canada).
3) There are circumstances in which immunity from disclosure or prosecution could be granted through the REB/IRB process in order to increase enrollment, obtain new knowledge, confirm previous information, or increase the accuracy of the information. However, there are significant barriers to utilizing this approach, including legal restrictions and the known inaccuracy of perpetrators’ self reports.
4) A North American Advisory Board on Ethics in Research on Maltreatment, composed of professionals conducting research in child maltreatment and other professionals experienced in REB/IRB requirements, is established to consult with individual researchers or REB/IRBs to address research questions or concerns in this highly sensitive area of research.