Hello My initial response is to your question 2: in ordinary reporting situations, one does not normally "notify the parent" that the report was made. My question echoes yours: "breaking the code" between the subject ID and identifying information may violate the assurance given in the "informed consent"... and I also question how you can do research with child subjects without parental consent.... Susan Wilde, Psy.D. >I have a question on research ethics and mandatory child abuse >reporting for which I would like to gauge the opinions of child >abuse researchers out there. > >Suppose data is collected from children on an instrument such as the >Conflict Tactics Scale-Parent/Child, using a computer self-report >methodology. In this methodology, the data collector never sees the >child's responses, and the responses exist only as an ASCII file of >numerical data. The data collector does not observe signs of abuse >or personally receive any disclosure of abuse. Some weeks or months >later, after the data is uploaded, a data analyst notices that some >children have endorsed CTS-PC items suggesting severe >parent-to-child violence. The data set includes no identifying >information about the child, but the technology does exist within >the study to track back to an indentifiable child through a separate >subject key table by breaking the code between subject ID's and >names. What is the ethical and legal responsibility of the study? >Would it be: > >1) Do nothing--this does not rise to the level of a specific >reasonable suspicion which would trigger reporting requirements >2) Track the identity of the child back through the key and make a >report to the authorities. If so, should the study also notify the >parent (presumptive perpetrator) that the report was made? >3) Track the identity of the child back through the key and >re-contact the child in order to clarify their response to the >computer and clarify if there is a reasonable suspicion which rises >to the level of a reporting requirement. If so, should the parent >(presumptive perpetrator) be contacted first? >4) Do something different than the options above--please specify >5) You ethically shouldn't do this study in the first place. > >Thanks for your input. > >Mark Chaffin -- ---------------- Susan Wilde, Psy.D.
[ Home |
About NDACAN | Datasets |
User Support |
Contribute Data |
Summer Research Institute ]
[ CMRL List Serve | Bibliography
| Measures Index |
Useful Links | Search ]
Copyright © 1996-2012 National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect