Ethics in Qualitative research with homeless youth. Ethical and Practical Issues Longitudinal Qualitative Field Research with Street Youth

Transcription

1 Ethics in Qualitative research with homeless youth Ethical and Practical Issues Longitudinal Qualitative Field Research with Street Youth

2 Explores the ethical and practical issues confronted when research engages marginalized populations of a mixed methods longitudinal study of 56 street youth in Halifax, N.S., and Toronto, ON. Team interviewed youth 4 times over the course of a year through a mixed-methods design of integrated qualitative and quantitative inquiry. Exiting street life

3 The research team included: 1 undergraduate student 1 volunteer turned research assistant 3 graduate students 2 research coordinators (with a master s degrees) 1 research coordinator (with a PhD) 3 lead investigators (academics) 8 youth participants The TEAM

4 Paper argues that research of this kind must work through a different kind of social science involving, not only a code of conduct but a way of being that involves every aspect of one s soul (Davidson, 1996:123) Populations, such as street youth, demands research to confront its own limits; provides us with an emancipatory opportunity to recast the research as a form of social justice. Reframing Research

5 Nobody involved in researching the social can avoid confronting ethical issues (Richardson and McMullen 2007: 115) P: But now, if I can t find a place or end up having a hard trouble with it then, yeah, I got to find somewhere to go whether I have some place to go or not. I: Are they helping you find a place? P: No. I: Well, I don t know if you ve ever heard about some of the programs. They have a housing worker who could help you I can give you her if you want to call her. I m sure she might help out. She s helped other people. Reframing Research

6 The team was challenged by, and struggled with, the nuanced entanglement of Participant and Subject. No need to hear your voice when I can talk about you better than you can speak about yourself only tell me about your pain. I want to hear your story. And then I will tell it back to you in a new way I am still the author, authority. I am still the colonizer. (Hooks, 1990) Upon reflection, the research required a grounded ethical process; a process that takes ethical ambiguity as a starting place and that actively searches for ethical dilemmas to be used in refining the research ethics strategy. The ethics and edges of intimacy

7 Field work as edge work (Ferrell and Hamm 1998) Our team struggled with balancing the integrity of the research with the emotional work of engaging participants Intimacy is often valued as a way to flatten the power gradient (Swartz, 2011); through 4 interviews, the team grappled with the intimacy they built and shared in with youth The ethics and edges of intimacy

8 Upon arrival at a youth s home and providing the compensation, one researcher noted that the young person stated, Oh man, great, I couldn t remember if this was the $40.00 study or the other $15.00 study so glad it s the $40.00 one! Many youth are savvy research participants (Karabanow 2006); our team strategized that we talk candidly about the honorarium. Our dialogue emphasized the the payment is not for a story but a modest appreciation for their expertise and time. The $40.00 study Monetizing Research Relationships

9 The field is constantly changing This, in turn, ignites the need for a broader, less rigid conception of the appropriate method that allows the researcher flexibility to be more open to the challenges of fieldwork. (England 1994: 81) In one instance, a team member was deeply concerned for a research participant and their well being (the person was pill sick and the researcher was worried about an overdose.) Identifying harms is ad-hoc, and the team struggled with when, and how, to intervene. In some cases, the interviewers actions or knowledge likely altered and impacted the very trajectory we were studying. Do No Harm?

10 Given the realities faced by our participants, our research team could not help but frame the data collection process as a kind of form of intervention. Far removed (in the field) from the formal bureaucratic discourse of consent, harm and risk, the research team were required to make instant decisions on how best support, help, act, or simply do something for the person in front of them. Do No Harm?

11 Intellectually, the notion of consent is simple to understand, and to explain, and to document. In practice, it is complex, nuanced, and dynamic. The team decided to depart from the original interview script, and together fleshed out a set of questions that permitted participants an opportunity to speak to the power differentials inherent in the research. See ya later Reciprocity & Distance

12 Yeah, in all the ways that you were talking about just like having a sounding board, someone to hear you out and talk to. So, yeah, I found the reflecting that I did during this study, like, right here in this situation to be good and helpful for me. It got me thinking about some of the things that I wasn t necessarily thinking about at home. So, yeah, I liked that about it. See ya later Reciprocity & Distance

13 With REB approval in-hand, and an intimate and sophisticated knowledge of the consent process and ethical processes rehearsed and understood, the team was still overwhelmed and at times underprepared for the realities of intimately engaging street youth, their stories, and the unfolding dynamics of navigating the objective stance of Research with the field realities of collecting data. Conclusions

14 While these stories, no matter how much we might theorize otherwise, must eventually be objectified as data in our own transcripts, analysis, and scholarly work, our attempt here is to shed (methodologically) light on how the data gets worked up, and to suggest the need for a more transparent and accountable fashioning of the process and field dynamics of research in this area. Conclusions

15 Dr. Jeff Karabanow Dr. Sean Kidd Dr. Jean Hughes Dr. Tyler Frederick Kelly Fenn Ted Naylor Kait Sullivan Caila Aube