Case Study 2 in which an incarcerated population is surveyed for potential detrimental effects from childhood trauma presents several ethical challenges.  The first consideration, respect for person, is achievable within the confines of the study. Although the participants are incarcerated, they are provided the ability to choose whether or not to participate.  The participants were also required to sign a consent form although the provided information does not indicate whether or not the consent was informed consent.  It is questionable, however, in that the individuals do lack autonomy due to the nature of them being incarcerated.  There are concerns as to whether the participants felt coerced to participate despite having been given the opportunity to decline participation.  When considering the aspect of beneficence, it would seem, without further inspection, that the researchers had no intention of doing harm and were maximizing benefits and minimizing harm; however, it is unclear from the information provided if the prisoners were offered any supportive or therapeutic services following the administration of the survey.  Individuals who have experienced traumatic childhood events may potentially have PTSD from the trauma and as a consequence of having to discuss the trauma, may essentially be retraumatized by this event.  There is no indication of services and follow up offered for the prisoners. While one could argue that the harm caused to an individual by having to relive a traumatic event is minimal, this is not the case.  In considering justice, it does not appear that prisoners are being exploited.  This study, however, does not need to be restricted to only surveying incarcerated individuals as people who have not committed violent crimes have also experienced childhood trauma.  This study does not appear to inflict an immediate risk to the subject but can potentially present a risk to the researcher as the data is collected via face to face interview with a prisoner.   It is not stipulated whether the prisoners were convicted of violent crimes or if they are in for “white-collar crimes.”  There is no apparent risk to society. The benefit to the researcher is solely obtaining the information required to complete the study.  The benefit to society is that researchers may determine a cause and effect relationship between childhood trauma and the propensity for those experiencing it to become incarcerated.  There is no obvious direct benefit to the prisoners unless the study was offering follow up care and treatment to the participants.