从伦理认可到护理伦理:从“护理人性化框架”的角度考虑将老年人纳入民族志研究

IF 1.8 3区 社会学 Q2 GERONTOLOGY Journal of Aging Studies Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jaging.2023.101162
Jayme Tauzer , Fiona Cowdell , Kristina Nässén
{"title":"从伦理认可到护理伦理:从“护理人性化框架”的角度考虑将老年人纳入民族志研究","authors":"Jayme Tauzer ,&nbsp;Fiona Cowdell ,&nbsp;Kristina Nässén","doi":"10.1016/j.jaging.2023.101162","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>A deeper understanding of care demands the methodological finesse of qualitative research: we must observe, listen, and witness to expose what matters to care recipients. In this paper, we – a team of three: one early-career researcher and two supervisors – reflect on our experiences of designing and then seeking ethics approval for ethnographic research on care for older adults, many of whom demonstrate a lack of capacity to consent to research. Viewing experiences of well-being and dignity as embedded within interpersonal negotiations, this study privileges care home residents' daily life, looking to stories and observations of daily life to reveal the complexities of well-being in the care home setting. This paper emphasizes the importance of using qualitative research methods to gain a deeper understanding of care practices, particularly in the context of care for older adults with varying cognitive capacities. By privileging the daily life experiences of care home residents and employing the logic of process consent, we aim to include the voices of all participants, not just those who can provide written informed consent. However, obtaining ethics approval for this type of research presents several challenges, requiring careful negotiation and the inclusion of consultee advice. This paper highlights the tensions between procedural ethics and the need for better inclusion of vulnerable populations in ethnographic research on care. By addressing these challenges, we can move towards a more context-sensitive and humanised approach to research ethics that values the lived experiences of care recipients.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47935,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Aging Studies","volume":"66 ","pages":"Article 101162"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From ethical approval to an ethics of care: Considerations for the inclusion of older adults in ethnographic research from the perspective of a ‘humanisation of care framework’\",\"authors\":\"Jayme Tauzer ,&nbsp;Fiona Cowdell ,&nbsp;Kristina Nässén\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jaging.2023.101162\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>A deeper understanding of care demands the methodological finesse of qualitative research: we must observe, listen, and witness to expose what matters to care recipients. In this paper, we – a team of three: one early-career researcher and two supervisors – reflect on our experiences of designing and then seeking ethics approval for ethnographic research on care for older adults, many of whom demonstrate a lack of capacity to consent to research. Viewing experiences of well-being and dignity as embedded within interpersonal negotiations, this study privileges care home residents' daily life, looking to stories and observations of daily life to reveal the complexities of well-being in the care home setting. This paper emphasizes the importance of using qualitative research methods to gain a deeper understanding of care practices, particularly in the context of care for older adults with varying cognitive capacities. By privileging the daily life experiences of care home residents and employing the logic of process consent, we aim to include the voices of all participants, not just those who can provide written informed consent. However, obtaining ethics approval for this type of research presents several challenges, requiring careful negotiation and the inclusion of consultee advice. This paper highlights the tensions between procedural ethics and the need for better inclusion of vulnerable populations in ethnographic research on care. By addressing these challenges, we can move towards a more context-sensitive and humanised approach to research ethics that values the lived experiences of care recipients.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47935,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Aging Studies\",\"volume\":\"66 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101162\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Aging Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890406523000634\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Aging Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890406523000634","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对护理的更深入理解需要定性研究的方法技巧:我们必须观察、倾听和见证,以揭示对护理对象重要的东西。在这篇论文中,我们——一个由三人组成的团队:一名早期职业研究人员和两名主管——反思了我们为老年人护理人种学研究设计并寻求伦理批准的经验,其中许多人表现出缺乏同意研究的能力。本研究将幸福和尊严的体验嵌入人际谈判中,对养老院居民的日常生活给予了特权,通过对日常生活的故事和观察来揭示养老院环境中幸福的复杂性。本文强调了使用定性研究方法来更深入地了解护理实践的重要性,特别是在护理具有不同认知能力的老年人的背景下。通过赋予养老院居民的日常生活体验以特权,并采用程序同意的逻辑,我们的目标是包括所有参与者的声音,而不仅仅是那些能够提供书面知情同意的人。然而,获得这类研究的伦理批准带来了一些挑战,需要仔细协商并纳入被咨询人的建议。本文强调了程序伦理与更好地将弱势群体纳入护理人种学研究的必要性之间的紧张关系。通过应对这些挑战,我们可以朝着更敏感和人性化的研究伦理方法迈进,重视护理对象的生活经历。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
From ethical approval to an ethics of care: Considerations for the inclusion of older adults in ethnographic research from the perspective of a ‘humanisation of care framework’

A deeper understanding of care demands the methodological finesse of qualitative research: we must observe, listen, and witness to expose what matters to care recipients. In this paper, we – a team of three: one early-career researcher and two supervisors – reflect on our experiences of designing and then seeking ethics approval for ethnographic research on care for older adults, many of whom demonstrate a lack of capacity to consent to research. Viewing experiences of well-being and dignity as embedded within interpersonal negotiations, this study privileges care home residents' daily life, looking to stories and observations of daily life to reveal the complexities of well-being in the care home setting. This paper emphasizes the importance of using qualitative research methods to gain a deeper understanding of care practices, particularly in the context of care for older adults with varying cognitive capacities. By privileging the daily life experiences of care home residents and employing the logic of process consent, we aim to include the voices of all participants, not just those who can provide written informed consent. However, obtaining ethics approval for this type of research presents several challenges, requiring careful negotiation and the inclusion of consultee advice. This paper highlights the tensions between procedural ethics and the need for better inclusion of vulnerable populations in ethnographic research on care. By addressing these challenges, we can move towards a more context-sensitive and humanised approach to research ethics that values the lived experiences of care recipients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
17.40%
发文量
70
审稿时长
50 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Aging Studies features scholarly papers offering new interpretations that challenge existing theory and empirical work. Articles need not deal with the field of aging as a whole, but with any defensibly relevant topic pertinent to the aging experience and related to the broad concerns and subject matter of the social and behavioral sciences and the humanities. The journal emphasizes innovations and critique - new directions in general - regardless of theoretical or methodological orientation or academic discipline. Critical, empirical, or theoretical contributions are welcome.
期刊最新文献
Aging together-with: The growing older of humans, non-humans and more-than-humans. A commentary Hidden in plain sight: Women and gendered dementia dynamics in the Australian Aged Care Royal Commission Four modes of embodiment in later life “Aging well” in knowledge-intensive service professions in Sweden – The idealization of youth in neoliberal labor markets Social engagement among older women in Singapore during the COVID-19 pandemic
×
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