Co-producing and navigating consent in participatory research with young people

IF 1.4 Q2 SOCIAL WORK Journal of Childrens Services Pub Date : 2019-09-05 DOI:10.1108/JCS-02-2019-0007
Elsie Whittington
{"title":"Co-producing and navigating consent in participatory research with young people","authors":"Elsie Whittington","doi":"10.1108/JCS-02-2019-0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nResearch within the fields of youth sexuality and safeguarding, and ethical governance more broadly, has traditionally prioritised risk aversion over the rights of young people to participate in and shape research. This excludes younger people from setting agendas and directly communicating their lived experience to those in power. The paper aims to discuss these issues.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis paper describes and draws upon findings from an innovative two year participatory action research study exploring sexual consent with young people through embedded and participatory research across seven sites. The project was designed with young people and practised non-traditional approaches to research consent. As well as co-producing research data, the findings highlight how methods of co-enquiry and being explicit about the research consent process enabled young people to develop competence that can be applied in other contexts.\n\n\nFindings\nThe paper addresses ethical tensions between young people’s rights to participation and protection. It argues that alongside robust safeguarding procedures, there is equal need to develop robust participation and engagement strategies with an explicit focus on young people’s competence, agency and rights to participate regardless of the perceived sensitivity of the topic.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe paper concludes with proposals for future youth-centred research practice. These relate to research design, ethical governance processes around risk and sensitive topics, emphasis on working collaboratively with young people and practitioners, a greater focus on children and young people’s rights – including Gillick competence and fluid models of consent. In doing so, it presents an essential point of reference for those seeking to co-produce research with young people in the UK and beyond.\n","PeriodicalId":45244,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Childrens Services","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/JCS-02-2019-0007","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Childrens Services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JCS-02-2019-0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

Purpose Research within the fields of youth sexuality and safeguarding, and ethical governance more broadly, has traditionally prioritised risk aversion over the rights of young people to participate in and shape research. This excludes younger people from setting agendas and directly communicating their lived experience to those in power. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach This paper describes and draws upon findings from an innovative two year participatory action research study exploring sexual consent with young people through embedded and participatory research across seven sites. The project was designed with young people and practised non-traditional approaches to research consent. As well as co-producing research data, the findings highlight how methods of co-enquiry and being explicit about the research consent process enabled young people to develop competence that can be applied in other contexts. Findings The paper addresses ethical tensions between young people’s rights to participation and protection. It argues that alongside robust safeguarding procedures, there is equal need to develop robust participation and engagement strategies with an explicit focus on young people’s competence, agency and rights to participate regardless of the perceived sensitivity of the topic. Originality/value The paper concludes with proposals for future youth-centred research practice. These relate to research design, ethical governance processes around risk and sensitive topics, emphasis on working collaboratively with young people and practitioners, a greater focus on children and young people’s rights – including Gillick competence and fluid models of consent. In doing so, it presents an essential point of reference for those seeking to co-produce research with young people in the UK and beyond.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在参与研究中与年轻人共同产生和引导同意
传统上,青年性行为和保护以及更广泛的道德治理领域的研究优先考虑风险规避,而不是年轻人参与和影响研究的权利。这使得年轻人无法制定议程,也无法直接向当权者传达他们的生活经验。本文旨在探讨这些问题。设计/方法/方法本文描述并借鉴了一项为期两年的创新参与性行动研究的结果,该研究通过七个地点的嵌入式和参与性研究探索与年轻人的性同意。该项目是由年轻人设计的,并采用了非传统的研究同意方法。除了共同生产研究数据外,研究结果还强调了共同调查和明确研究同意过程的方法如何使年轻人能够培养可应用于其他环境的能力。研究结果本文探讨了年轻人参与权和受保护权之间的伦理矛盾。报告认为,除了强有力的保护程序外,同样需要制定强有力的参与和参与战略,明确关注年轻人的能力、能动性和参与权利,而不管这个话题的敏感性如何。论文最后对未来以青年为中心的研究实践提出了建议。这些问题涉及研究设计、围绕风险和敏感议题的伦理治理进程、强调与青年人和从业人员合作、更加关注儿童和青年人的权利——包括吉利克能力和流动的同意模式。在这样做的过程中,它为那些寻求与英国和其他国家的年轻人共同开展研究的人提供了一个重要的参考点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊最新文献
“Friendly, local and welcoming” – evaluation of a community mental health early intervention service From “intimate-insider” to “relative-outsider”: an autoethnographic account of undertaking social work research in one’s own “backyard” Effective child well-being practices, barriers and priority actions: survey findings from service providers and policymakers in 22 countries during COVID-19 Child First and the end of ‘bifurcation’ in youth justice? Why are there higher rates of children looked after in Wales?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1