Developing Ethical Guidelines for Safeguarding Children during Social Research
A working party of academics from both professional safeguarding backgrounds and research backgrounds developed and wrote ethical guidelines on safeguarding children in research on behalf of their faculty research ethics committee. The working party encountered a lack of useful precedents while developing the guidelines leading to a lengthy process of debate and consideration of the issues. This paper explores the various issues and dilemmas arising during this process, particularly the tension between safeguarding children from abuse and maintaining research confidentiality. One of the main areas of discussion was how to establish the limits of confidentiality without compromising the research in hand. The role and responsibilities of researchers in supporting children's welfare, and the development of procedures for ensuring that safeguarding is effective are discussed as key elements. In addition, the issues researchers may face when determining thresholds for intervention are considered alongside the uncertainties created by considerations of the extent to which children can give informed consent in research contexts. The paper reflects the process of considering these issues and the conclusions the working party drew as to how best to support children's welfare during research. It also outlines the key elements of the guidelines and the structures developed to ensure researchers could get advice if suspected child abuse became an issue in their research. The paper includes a short version of the guidelines which were eventually approved across the Higher Education Institute.
Researching Children’s Mobilities
This chapter follows on from Chapter 2 by considering the ways in which these conceptualisations have been incorporated into varying approaches to researching children’s mobilities. It is here (understandably as we are researchers) that our contentions around interdependency and relationality begin to be more fully illuminated. This chapter explores a range of methodological and epistemological issues relating to research around children’s mobility. In doing so, the chapter considers how methodological approaches that focus solely on children might lead to an unfinished, incomplete picture. Drawing from case studies of empirical research, the chapter critically evaluates the range of methods that have been applied in grasping the embodied nature of children’s mobilities and the range of contexts in which they are situated, including visual (Murray 2009b; Pimlott-Wilson 2012) and mobile (Buscher et al. 2010; Fincham et al. 2010).
School Counselors and Confidentiality: Factors Affecting Professional Choices.
Confidentiality has long been held as critical to gaining a client's trust. Children have the right to expect that the adult protection includes protection of their privacy rights (Huey & Remley, 1988a). Zingaro (1983) believes that a child's right to privacy, regardless of the child's age, should only be compromised in very extreme circumstances; however, extreme circumstances can be variously interpreted. It is widely believed that without the assurance of confidentiality, many students would not seek help or would not be entirely forthcoming (Ford, Millstein, Halpern-Felsher, & Irwin, 1997). School counselors are frequently confronted with the challenge of balancing the rights of minor clients for confidentiality with the legitimate rights and concerns of others and a counselor's responsibility to act in a minor child's best interest. In a 1983 unsuccessful suit Roman v. Appleby, brought by parents against a school counselor, a U. S. federal district court noted that in schools the constitutional rights of children, parents, administrators, and teachers all compete (American Counseling Association, 1993). Managing confidentiality is often the most difficult ethical issue facing school counselors. Counselor Codes and Confidentiality for Minors The primacy of confidentiality is clear in the codes of ethics and standards of practice for the American Counseling Association (ACA) and the American School Counselors Association (ASCA), which devote considerable attention to confidentiality. ACA (1995) defines a counselor's obligations to all clients and to minor clients in particular, "Counselors act in the best interests of clients and take measures to safeguard confidentiality" (p 3). The American School Counselor Association (1992) makes its position clear: "Each person has the right to privacy and thereby the right to expect the counselor-client relationship to comply with all laws, policies and ethical standards pertaining to confidentiality" (p. 1). Concurrently, both ACA and ASCA suggest collaboration with parents and families in situations that involve minor clients and their confidentiality. "A school counselor respects the inherent rights and responsibilities of the parents for their children and endeavors to establish a cooperative relationship with parents to facilitate the maximum development of the counselee" (ASCA, 1992, p. 2). Complicating Factors Inconsistent Rules and Confidentiality with Minors ASCA (1992; 1986) repeatedly refers to counselors' obligations to law and local guidelines. Yet these guidelines often vary considerably between states and/or local jurisdictions and may vary within school districts or by level of school (Baker, 1996). Courts have dealt both with parental rights and the establishment of a mature-minor concept in terms of an adolescent owning their privacy as well as other rights (Fischer & Sorenson, 1996). Schmidt (1996) suggests that some states have specifically granted confidentiality (in the form of privilege) to students while other states are mute. School board policies and community standards may necessitate breaking confidentiality. One Florida school board has established specific procedures for school personnel when dealing with issues of contraceptives and abortion (Clay County Public School Board, 1996). Even when the administrative policies or rules are clear, some counselors express ambivalence about following them. In Davis and Mickelson s (1994) survey of school counselors, ethical dilemmas that involved issues of student client privacy, confidentiality, and parental rights received less than 50% agreement regarding the preferred ethical or correct legal choices. Research with helping professionals, for example, suggests that knowledge of the rules of abuse reporting does not always predict compliance (Butz, 1985; Crenshaw, Lichtenberg, & Bartell, 1993). Parental Rights ASCA (1992;1986) recognizes that school counselors have multiple obligations that extend beyond their student client, including families, teachers, administrators, and other students. …