Re: research ethics question

["Susan Wilde" <susan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

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.