Abstract
Prevailing state and institutional ideologies regarding race/ethnicity, gender, and sexuality help to shape, and are influenced by, research priorities. Research ethics committees perform a gatekeeper role in this process. In this commentary, we describe efforts to obtain approval from the ethics committee of a large medical institution for research into the treatment of homosexual persons by health professionals in the South African military during the apartheid era. The committee questioned the "scientific validity" of the study, viewing it as having a "political" rather than a "scientific" purpose. They objected to the framing of the research topic within a human rights discourse and appeared to be concerned that the research might lead to action against health professionals who committed human rights abuses against lesbians and gay men during apartheid. The process illustrates the ways in which heterosexism, and concerns to protect the practice of health professionals from scrutiny, may influence the decisions of ethics committees. Ethics that exclude research on lesbian and gay health cannot be in the public interest. Ethics committees must be challenged to examine the ways in which institutionalized ideologies influence their decision making.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (58.4 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Alberti K. G. Local research ethics committees. BMJ. 1995 Sep 9;311(7006):639–640. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7006.639. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Alderson P., Goodey C. Theories of consent. BMJ. 1998 Nov 7;317(7168):1313–1315. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7168.1313. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Benson P. R. The social control of human biomedical research: an overview and review of the literature. Soc Sci Med. 1989;29(1):1–12. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(89)90122-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Blunt J., Savulescu J., Watson A. J. Meeting the challenges facing research ethics committees: some practical suggestions. BMJ. 1998 Jan 3;316(7124):58–61. doi: 10.1136/bmj.316.7124.58. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ellison G. T., de Wet T. The use of 'racial' categories in contemporary South African health research. A survey of articles published in the South African Medical Journal between 1992 and 1996. S Afr Med J. 1997 Dec;87(12):1671–1679. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- King G. Institutional racism and the medical/health complex: a conceptual analysis. Ethn Dis. 1996 Winter-Spring;6(1-2):30–46. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rubenstein L, London L. The UDHR and The Limits of Medical Ethics: The Case of South Africa. Health Hum Rights. 1998;3(2):160–175. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Savulescu J., Chalmers I., Blunt J. Are research ethics committees behaving unethically? Some suggestions for improving performance and accountability. BMJ. 1996 Nov 30;313(7069):1390–1393. doi: 10.1136/bmj.313.7069.1390. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sieber J. E., Stanley B. Ethical and professional dimensions of socially sensitive research. Am Psychol. 1988 Jan;43(1):49–55. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.43.1.49. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- de Gruchy J., London L., Baldwin-Ragaven L., Lewin S. The difficult road to truth and reconciliation--the health sector takes its first steps. Health and Human Rights Project Support Group. S Afr Med J. 1998 Aug;88(8):975–979. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]