There is inherent risk when someone that has no power is used in research, this would include the men and women in the prison system. The study proposed offers some risk to the prisoners in that they would be recalling past traumatic events, this may be difficult for them to process and if therapeutic intervention is not offered then this study serves little if any benefit to the prisoner. There is also the risk of their private information becoming public as there is no note that this information is to be made confidential. There would need to be protocols in place to keep information private. There is risk for the researcher in that the interviews are to be face to face and though there are precautions taken, entering a prison does not have a guarantee of safety. There is also the risk that the subjects are not interested in sharing information needed or leave pieces out that could be valuable. Risk to society appears to be minimal in that this is information gathering.
Benefits to the prisoner are not evident unless they gain satisfaction in the possibility of their information being helpful to future generations. It is possible that a benefit is gained in that they have something novel to look forward to in their schedule or they feel validated sharing their story. It would be of great benefit if they received some therapy or counseling to help them process the childhood trauma and improve their interpersonal relationships. Benefit to the researcher is that they get the information they need to further their study and hopefully help the group they are focused on. This study does have the potential to greatly affect society. If interventions can be made to help children and youth that have experienced trauma they could reduce the risk of poor interpersonal relationships. This study reminds me of ACES (adverse childhood events study) where points were given to traumas and based on the score (1-10) there is a correlation to social, emotional and health in adulthood. The higher the score showing greater risk.
The level of IRB approval would be Full Board because this research involves people within the prison system. Though it is merely a collection of data and an interview the prisoners social situation puts them at risk of being exploited. There is also the possibility that in the interview the prisoner could disclose information that would be of a mandatory reporting nature adding another element that makes this study higher risk. One other piece that makes this a high risk study is the possibility of a data breach since the prisoners are sharing personal, possibly incriminating information. The Full Board level of IRB approval would mean that everyone on the board meets to approve the research design, consents and procedures most would have to approve it. They are looking to see if the study meets federal regulations to protect the subjects. It is possible that this study could be rejected due to there being no obvious benefit to the subjects though they are taking some risk in sharing their information.
References:
Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE’s).(2020, April 3).retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/childabuseandneglect/acestudy/index.html
Emory University Institutional Review Board. (2019).retrieved from http://www.irb.emory.edu/policies/review-types/full-board.html
Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (US). Trauma-Informed Care in Behavioral Health Services. Rockville (MD): Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (US); 2014. (Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series, No. 57.) Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK207201
Buchanan T. W. (2007). Retrieval of emotional memories. Psychological bulletin, 133(5), 761–779. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.5.761
Laura, I thought the picture was a great addition to your post. I also thought you well covered the points to be included in the post. You really considered the fact that possibly there would not be a benefit to prisoners to participate in a study such as the one described in case study-2. I did not also consider that it might be dangerous for someone to come into a prison to do interviews. Interesting thoughts on safety of the interviewer that I did not consider. I happen to be a person that thinks everyone wants to be a rule follower, even though I know it is not the case. I just like to see the good in everyone. I would be a horrible prison worker. According to an article I read on working in a prison, you can not expect to be safe. This article says working in a prison, you will se bad things. The rate of suicide for correctional officers is twice that of the general public. Many suffer correctional officers suffer from post traumatic stress disorder. ( Whitehead, 2018). I am not thinking that a correctional officer and a study interviewer are lumped together in risk factors, but the statistics listed of affects to correctional officers does make you pause to think about safety for anyone that enters a prison.
I also took the opportunity to examine the ACE study that you referenced and found the study to be reassuring that ACE and associated harms are preventable. Programs are being developed that can lesson long term harm to children that experience adverse childhood experiences. ( Adverse Childhood Experiences, 2020).
References
Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE’s).(2020, April 3).retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/childabuseandneglect/acestudy/index.html
Whitehead, J. (2018). What to expect as a new correctional officer.
Retrieved from https:// inpublicsafety.com
Thanks for the article from the corrections officer, that would definitely be a tough job. I actually think the researcher might be more at risk for disease exposure. With COVID I doubt they would even be able to enter.
How can your support your standpoints with ethical guidelines? What applies to your analysis?
With regard to the subject of needing to be prepared to handle stress that questioning may invoke for the subjects. People process trauma in different ways and that trauma can resurface in different ways as well. Some will have a trigger that sends them back to the event or can have flashbacks. If you plan to question and draw up these events, the person conducting the interview should be able to help the subject to deal with these emotions. “Behavioral health service providers should be prepared to help the client get regrounded so that they can distinguish between what is happening now versus what had happened in the past”(SAMHSA)
There is also the possibility that the person is unable to recall past traumatic events and so though their story would be valuable to the study and perhaps has had a deleterious effect on their relationships they will not be able to pass on the information.
Buchanan T. W. (2007). Retrieval of emotional memories. Psychological bulletin, 133(5), 761–779. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.5.761
Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (US). Trauma-Informed Care in Behavioral Health Services. Rockville (MD): Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (US); 2014. (Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series, No. 57.) Chapter 3, Understanding the Impact of Trauma. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK207191/