Respect for persons

Preview image for a discussion sheet about the oversight of human research.

Oversight bodies for human research – Human Research Ethics commentary

The fact that a project is subject to oversight by institutional and national bodies may on the one hand increase the perceived authority of ethics requirements and of the feedback of review body, but sometimes it can undermine it.  This commentary sheet looks at the issues and makes some suggestions.  This and other resources accessible by patrons of AHRECS.

Oversight bodies for human research – Human Research Ethics commentary Read More »

A warm up activity – A Human Research Ethics discussion activity

This discussion activity is intended to warm up attendees at a professional development event about Human Research Ethics.  This is to encourage a reflection on how different groups regard research participants.  There are no right answers, the objective is to get people talking and reflecting on Human Research Ethics matters.  It is also an opportunity to reflect upon matters such as paternity in decision making, showing respect and conflicts of interests.

A warm up activity – A Human Research Ethics discussion activity Read More »

Top banner image for the commentary item on the role and recognition of advisers in human research.

The role and recognition of advisers/technicians/assistants in human research – A Human Research Ethics commentary

A commentary sheet about the appropriate role and recognition of advisers/technicians/assistants in human research and the way in which they are acknowledged.  This includes the degree to which they are delegated disclosing uncomfortable or scary information to new participants.

The role and recognition of advisers/technicians/assistants in human research – A Human Research Ethics commentary Read More »

Funny cartoon about a participant being crushed under the first consent form.

You can’t sue us mechanism – A Human Research Ethics discussion activity

This discussion activity explores a practical ethical challenge we have created ourselves.  Consent strategies should be about individuals being able to make informed decisions about whether or not to take part in a research project.  What we have ended up with are long documents and forms. They require potential participants to have considerable patience to wait for them and a degree of legal acumen.  The objective now appears to be to establish why you can’t sue the researcher or their host institution.

You can’t sue us mechanism – A Human Research Ethics discussion activity Read More »

Cover image of the talk by Gary Allen and Mandy Downing

Vulnerability, research ethics review and the review of s4 of the National Statement – A Human Research Ethics talk by Gary Allen and Mandy Downing

How we approach vulnerability can empower and respect individuals or compound their isolation and discrimination they face. In this 11 minute talk by Dr Gary Allen and spoken by Mandy Downing. This talk was sponsored by QUT as part of its HREC professional development and the Committe’s active engagement with the National Statement.

Vulnerability, research ethics review and the review of s4 of the National Statement – A Human Research Ethics talk by Gary Allen and Mandy Downing Read More »