RE: research ethics question

["psylevin" <psylevin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Does anyone know whether the certificate of confidentiality has been
tested in state courts in the context of mandated reporting? Murray
Levine

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu
[mailto:owner-CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu] On Behalf Of
Kopacz, Fred
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 12:40 PM
To: Child Maltreatment Researchers
Subject: RE: research ethics question

The legal requirements should take precedence - if your state has the
standard requirement for disclosure of suspected abuse, then that has to
be done unless you have managed to get a certificate from the Office of
Human Research Protections exempting your study (see
http://ohrp.osophs.dhhs.gov/humansubjects/guidance/certconpriv.htm). As
several colleagues have suggested, this reasonable possibility should
have been anticipated and disclosed in the statement provided to the
youth and their guardians before participating in the study. Absent a
certificate, you can not withhold some information where legal
disclosure requirements are present. Your example is just one of those
items.

Fred Kopacz
907.729.4992
-----Original Message-----
From: Chaffin, Mark J. [mailto:Mark-Chaffin@ouhsc.edu] 
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 8:02 AM
To: Child Maltreatment Researchers
Subject: research ethics question

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