RE: Research Waiver

[Lisa Amaya-Jackson <laj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Vol 15 Journal of Interpersonal Violence that came out this past summer is devoted to the issue of methodology, ethics, and legal issues in directly questioning children about abuse--. This might be helpful  if the research involved interviews children. Issues around reporting, IRB considerations, and Certificate of Confidentiality are discussed.  Des Runyan was the guest editor.

lisa AJ
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 
Lisa Amaya-Jackson, MD, MPH
Asst. Professor Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center
Director, Trauma Evaluation, Treatment, & Research Program
Center for Child & Family Health, N.C.--Consortium of Duke, UNC-CH, and NCCU
3518 Westgate Dr., Suite 100, Durham, NC 27707
(919) 419-3474x405  FAX: (919) 419-9353  
email:  LAJ@Duke.edu
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  

-----Original Message-----
From:	Steven J. Ondersma [SMTP:S.Ondersma@wayne.edu]
Sent:	Friday, October 20, 2000 9:22 AM
To:	Child Maltreatment Researchers
Subject:	Re:  Research Waiver

The "waiver" you seek is called a certificate of confidentiality, and is not
a state but a federal document, available through NIH regardless of whether
or not they are funding the research (a list of names and numbers is below).
The NIH states that the certificate has held up in test cases when state or
local laws attempted to prevail.  Essentially, the COC makes the bearer a
voluntary rather than a mandated reporter for the approved research project.
Approval is not automatic, of course--an application must be sent and
approved.

The ethical questions are obviously complex, but in part come down to
whether the primary goal of research is to answer important research
questions while protecting participants from harm due to the research
itself, or whether the primary goal of research is to investigate and
intervene.  Faced with a mandate to report (and thus a requirement to warn
participants of that mandate), many questions are simply not worth bothering
to ask in a given research project (and worse, perhaps should not be asked
given the ethical problems with research participation that leads to social
harm), or are simply asked in conditions of complete anonymity (i.e., the
researcher does not know the participant's name and does not have access to
it).  Do children ultimately benefit more when researchers simply can't ask
certain questions or must ask them anonymously (thus removing any hope of
longitudinal follow-up), or when those questions can be posed with true
confidentiality?  True confidentiality does not mean that researchers cannot
attempt to provide assistance when concerns are present; it only means that
they may discover things that otherwise could not have been known.

There are professionals who should and do take identification and
intervention with at-risk children as their primary goal.  Whether
researchers must also do so in all cases is an important question with
ethical traps on both sides of the issue.

___________________________________
Steven J. Ondersma, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor--Research
Merrill-Palmer Institute
Wayne State University
71 E. Ferry Ave.
Detroit, MI  48202
Office:  (313) 872-2706
Fax:  (313) 875-0947
S.Ondersma@wayne.edu
www.mpi.wayne.edu


Primary contact:

Ms. Olga Boikess
National Institute of Mental Health
(301) 443-3877

Drug abuse research:

Jacqueline Porter or Susan Solomon
301-443-2755

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Dr. Dorita Sewell
301-443-7023