A number of ethical issues can be involved in conducting any form of social research, however, when researching on sensitive topics such as IPV exposure, ensuring the safety of the participants and to prevent any further harm should be dominant throughout the research process (Beecham, 2009). Miller and Bell (2002) stressed that ethical considerations are relevant before, during and after research as part of an ongoing process. Sullivan and Cain (2004) suggested that research should be conducted in an environment where participants feel safe. Mullender (2000) highlighted the need to tackle the issue of consent, the potential for distress, and the need for sensitivity to reduce the risk of harm while doing research on domestic violence. Dickson-Swift et al. (2008) also highlighted that issues of rapport development, researcher self-disclosure, listening to untold stories, feelings of guilt and vulnerability, leaving the research relationship and researcher exhaustion should
68
be taken into consideration when doing research on a sensitive topic. Flaskerud and Winslow (1998) emphasized that a researcher working with vulnerable people has an ethical responsibility for their well-being and not making them more vulnerable.
My research on IPV exposure of young adults raised some important ethical issues that needed to be addressed in the research design and methods. Issues of consent, deception, debriefing, withdrawal from research, harming the participants by a sensitive question, arousing feelings of distress through the recollection of painful memories, keeping confidentiality and anonymity of the interviewee, and risk of doing this sensitive nature of research on my well-being as a researcher were all concerns.
The need to carefully weigh the potential risks and benefits of undertaking research and to take every possible preventative measures to limit possible harm and maximise possible benefits have been highlighted by different researchers working on sensitive issues (Ellsberg & Heise, 2005; Flaskerud & Winslow, 1998; Harding, 1987; Hallowell et al., 2005; World Health Organization, 2000). It has also been acknowledged that sensitive research is often stressful for both the researcher and the interviewee (Alty & Rodham, 1998; Dickson-Swift et al., 2008; Lee-Treweek & Linkogle, 2002). In the context of my research, I was well aware that talking to young adults about their exposure to IPV and asking them to recall very private and traumatic experiences may result in young adults feeling threatened because of the potential for labelling. Throughout my research, the safety and well-being of my research participants was paramount. A youth counsellor from the National Institute of Psychology, Quaid-i-Azam University Islamabad, Pakistan, accompanied me in data collection, and participants were encouraged to contact her. She was available in each university for a week. For the future they were told they could access a youth helpline
69
service by calling free of charge from anywhere in Pakistan. A detailed brochure of this service was provided to the participants, along with the booklet of scales. I was also ready to discontinue an interview on seeing a participant become emotionally distressed and to provide support to him/her until s/he felt better or reached a decision about whether to withdraw.
In one interview with a young man whose mother had passed away a couple of years ago, he started weeping whilst sharing the torture she had experienced from his father. Two other participants in their interviews had needed emotional support during the interview, however, handling that situation was the most difficult in all my 25 interviews as I was faced with a young man crying in front of me. I wanted to hold his hand to console him or pat his shoulder or head to make him understand that I understood his feelings and emotions. However, I knew I could not do this as this was not according to the norms of our society. The next problem with that interviewee was that he did not have eye contact with me, but I understood that he was from a culture where it was considered bad to look at other women. After the interview, I referred him to a male counsellor who promised to provide his services free of charge.
Participants were assured of anonymity and informed that all information provided by them would be kept confidential and only used for research purposes. It was emphasised that their experiences and perspectives would not only add to the general body of knowledge on this issue but would also help psychologists and social scientists in providing a baseline to start any kind of intervention plan for young people in Pakistan. I believe that sharing my own experiences was very helpful in making them feel more comfortable in discussing issues with me as they knew that they were talking to a person who understood and could relate to their emotional experiences. The ways
70
in which they responded by providing very personal information in the surveys indicated to me that they trusted me, which created an even greater sense of responsibility for me as a researcher.
Korteslumoa et al. (2003) highlight the need for interviewers to spend time with participants before conducting an interview. Considering this, a two day visit for data collection for the survey was arranged in each of the departments and the first day focused on rapport development with the prospective participants. We (I along with a trained field assistant, and a youth counsellor) introduced ourselves, both parts of the research were verbally explained and the information sheet (Appendix K) was given to everyone. I asked teachers to leave the students with me and the issues of voluntary consent, anonymity, confidentiality, and right to quit at any time were discussed thoroughly and students’ related queries were answered. They were also told about the youth counsellor who was available for several days to discuss any issues or concerns, whether personal, peer related or studies related. This was done to make them feel safer and more secure about agreeing to participate.
Voluntary informed consent is a basic requirement for any kind of research; however, in any sensitive research it becomes more important as well as more difficult (Liamputtong, 2010). It was difficult to decide whether the participants should be explicitly told that the research included questions regarding IPV or whether it was sufficient to warn participants that sensitive topics would be raised. The participants in the survey part of the study were required to provide written informed consent whereas verbal consent was recoded for each of the in-depth interviews.
Adopting the approach of World Health Organization’s Violence Against Women study (2005), I did not use the term ‘violence’ in my research, however it was clearly
71
written in the information sheet that the study was about ‘experiences and perspectives of young adults regarding conflicts between parents or one parent using verbal or physical methods to show his/her anger to other parent’ and that some of the topics would be very personal (about them and their parents) and difficult to talk about. They were clearly told that participation in the research was completely voluntary and they were under no obligation to accept the invitation to take part. They were told that they were free to withdraw from the study at any time and without giving a reason or explanation to the researcher. Moreover, they were informed about their right to ask any question about the study at any time before and during their participation. With the interviews too where participants themselves contacted me to take part, I continually reaffirmed the issue of consent by saying that participation was voluntary and they could withdraw whenever they wanted to at any stage of the research.
With such sensitive research, the privacy of location was very important in making participants feel comfortable and free to talk. I made sure to get a separate office in the respective university departments for the youth counsellor so that students could go freely and discuss any issues they were facing. Interviews were also arranged in that room and care taken not to book any appointments at the time of interviews. This procedure was adopted to maintain privacy and not to let others (students and teachers) know about the purpose of the research participants’ appointment. To make interviews feel more informal, light refreshments during the interview were provided so that it could be conducted in a conversational style rather than a question and answer session.
To ensure my own and our team members’ well-being, we organized a timetable to collect data in a way that there remained a gap of at least one week in the visit to the
72
next university and during data collection days, we regularly held debriefing sessions with a professional psychologist (my colleague) at National Institute of Psychology.
The next section of the chapter presents the details of how the study was carried out.