five - Research with psychiatric patients: knowing their own minds?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 January 2022
Summary
“I couldn’t cope at home; the house didn’t feel safe any longer. The walls I felt were closing in. I saw eyes everywhere, they were just black eyes to begin with, but when I confronted my abuser I realised they were his eyes. I went back to the same [psychiatric] ward, back and forward … they would change my tablets, or up my tablets, then send me out. It helped in the sense that it gave me time out, but it wasn’t dealing with the problem.
“One night I had an urge to talk. I said to the night nurse, ‘Could I wait until it quietens down a bit and talk to you?’ She said, ‘I don’t have time’, told me to take my sleeping tablets … but the charge nurse was brilliant. He said, ‘Talk to me if you need to…. He admitted 75% of people coming through the doors had been abused; and they didn’t know how to deal with it.”
Introduction
What is ethical behaviour when it comes to consulting vulnerable, mentally distressed people, like the woman quoted above, about their experiences of psychiatric care? This question became a source of dispute with a Research Ethics Committee (REC) in my own Scottish study of women with mental health problems, who had survived childhood sexual abuse (Nelson, 2001). Issues about research participants’ freedom of choice, the independence of social researchers and gaps in understanding between the worlds of social and medical research have relevance that goes beyond this particular study.
This chapter highlights my experiences as a researcher within the Beyond Trauma project, in order to examine the ethical issues that arise within the ethical governance process in more detail. By considering a specific example, this chapter reflects on the governance process from the social researchers, professionals’ and participants’ perspectives. This chapter also considers the impact that REC decisions have on research, knowledge and services.
The qualitative Beyond Trauma research project had the practical aim of improving mental health services for female survivors of childhood sexual abuse. It explored their experiences of services, and their views on how these might be improved. It also consulted mental health professionals and voluntary sector agencies working with survivors for their perspectives on the issue. Six months into the study, the local REC suspended its approval of the project, putting the survival of the project at risk.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Researchers and their 'Subjects'Ethics, Power, Knowledge and Consent, pp. 91 - 104Publisher: Bristol University PressPrint publication year: 2004