The aim of this article is to take relational ethics concepts and apply them to the context of application to research ethics committees for approval to carry out research. The process of a multinational qualitative research application is described. The article suggests that a relational ethics approach can address two issues: how qualitative proposals are interpreted by research ethics committees and how this safeguards potentially vulnerable respondents. In relational terms, the governance of a research project may be enhanced by shared ownership and willingness to engage in mutual dialogue. This challenges both researchers and research ethics committees to reframe their understanding of roles and functions in the assessment of research protocols, particularly those of a qualitative nature and those that address end-of-life issues.
Denholm JTResearch bureaucracy in the United Kingdom. Research governance is about protection, not convenience [Letter]. BMJ2004; 329: 623.
2.
Elliott T.Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom. Time has come to face research governance. BMJ2004; 329: 623—24.
3.
Walsh DA, Hewitt M.Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom. Ethics committees have important roles in research [Letter]. BMJ2004; 329: 623.
4.
Pattison J., Stacey T.Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom. Seeking a balance: response from the Department of Health and COREC [Letter]. BMJ2004; 329: 622.
5.
Masterson G.Two decades on an ethics committee [Letter] . BMJ2006; 332: 615.
6.
Beales ILP.Ethics review in research: role of ethics committee review is interpreted widely [Letter]. BMJ2004; 328: 10.
7.
Ashcroft RE, Newson AJ, Benn PMW.Reforming research ethics committees. Latest proposals are a missed opportunity for a radical review. BMJ2005 ; 331: 587—88.
8.
While AEEthics committees: impediments to research or guardians of ethical standards? [Short report]. BMJ1995; 311: 661.
9.
Lux AL, Edwards SW, Osborne JPResponses of local research ethics committees (LRECs) to a study with multicentre research ethics committee approval. BMJ2000 ; 32: 1182—83.
10.
Glasziou P., Chalmers I.Ethics review roulette: what can we learn? BMJ2004; 328: 121—22.
11.
Wald D.Bureaucracy of ethics applications. BMJ2004 ; 329: 282—84.
12.
Alberti Kgmm.Multicentre research ethics committees: has the cure been worse than the disease? BMJ2000; 320: 1157—58.
13.
Nicholl J.The ethics of research ethics committees [Letter]. BMJ2000; 320: 1217.
14.
Stevenson C. , Beech I.Playing the power game for qualitative researchers: the possibility of a post-modern approach. J Adv Nurs1998; 27: 790—97.
15.
Peck D., Jones A.Bureaucratic barriers to research and research training in the NHS . Clin Psychol2004; 36: 7—10.
16.
Johnson M.Real-world ethics and nursing research. Nurs Times Res2004; 9: 251—61.
17.
Liberati A.Research ethics committees: can they contribute to the improvement of clinical research in Europe? J Ambul Care Manage2004 ; 27: 154—65.
18.
Hearnshaw H.Comparison of requirements of research ethics committees in 11 European countries for a non-invasive interventional study . BMJ2004; 328: 140—41.
19.
Bergum V., Dossetor J.Relational ethics: the full meaning of respect. Hagerstown, MD: University Publishing Group, 2005.
20.
Pellegrino E.The metamorphosis of medical ethics: a 30 year retrospective. JAMA1993; 269: 1158—62.
21.
Gillon R ed. Principles of health care ethics. New York: Wiley , 1994.
22.
Dillon RSRespect and care: towards moral integration. Can J Philos1992; 22: 105—32.
23.
Henson Helmich R.Analysis of the concept of mutuality. J Nurs Scholarsh1997; 29: 77—81.
24.
Gadow S.Relational narratives: the postmodern turn in nursing ethics. Sch Inq Nurs Pract1999; 13: 57—70.
25.
Fredriksson L.Modes of relating in a caring conversation: a research synthesis on presence, touch and listening. J Adv Nurs1999; 30: 1167—76.
26.
Fredriksson L., Eriksson K.The patient's narrative of suffering — a path to health? An interpretive research synthesis on narrative understanding . Scand J Caring Sci2001; 15: 3—11.
27.
Fredriksson L., Eriksson K.The ethics of the caring conversation . Nurs Ethics2003; 10: 138—48.
28.
Abma T.Struggling with the fragility of life: a relational-narrative approach to ethics in palliative nursing. Nurs Ethics2005; 12: 337—48.
29.
Nussbaum MCThe therapy of desire: theory and practice in hellenistic ethics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press , 1994.
30.
Sherwin S.No longer patient: feminist ethics and health care. Philadelphia , PA: Temple University Press, 1992 : 49.
31.
Schultz DS, Carnevale FAEngagement and suffering in responsible caregiving: on overcoming maleficence in health care. Theor Med1996 ; 17: 189—207.
32.
Levinas E.Totality and infinity: an essay on exteriority. (Lingis A trans.) Boston, MA: Martinus Nijhoff, 1979 .
33.
Buber M.Between man and man. (Greger Smith R trans.)New York: Macmillan, 1965.
34.
Lewis B., Hinds M.NHS networks report. Improved pathway for health research. 2005. Retrieved 12 February, 2007, from: http://www.mmnetwork.nhs.uk/downloads/news/Improved%20pathway%20for%20health%20research.doc
35.
O'Higgins M. (Chair). Report of the ad hoc advisory group on the operation of NHS research ethics committees. Department of Health, UK. 2005. Retrieved 12 February, 2007, from: http://www.dh.gov.uk/PublicationsAndStatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidelines/DH_4112416
36.
European Parliament, Council of the European Union. Clinical Trials Directive (2001/20/EC). 2001. Retrieved 12 February, 2007, from: http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home
37.
Larkin PJ, Dierckx de Casterlé B., Schotsmans P.Multi-lingual translation issues in qualitative research: reflections on a metaphorical processQual Health Res2007; 17: 468—76.
38.
Morse JMA review committee's guide for evaluating qualitative proposals. Qual Health Res2003; 13: 833—51.
39.
Koenig B., Back AL, LaVera Crawley M.Qualitative methods in end-of-life research: recommendations to enhance the protection of human subjects. J Pain Symptom Manage2003; 25: 43—52.
40.
Carverhill PAQualitative research in thanatology. Death Stud2002; 26: 195—207.
41.
Clark D.What is qualitative research and what can it contribute to palliative care?Palliat Med1997; 112: 159—66.
42.
Normand C., Meyer J., Bentley J.Research ethics and complex studies. NT Res2003; 8: 17—26.
43.
Cutcliffe JR , Ramcharan P.Judging the ethics of qualitative research: considering the `ethic as process' model. Health Soc Care Community2001; 9: 358—66.
44.
Hand S.The Levinas reader. Oxford: Blackwell , 1989.
45.
Pellegrino ED, Thomasma DCA philosophical basis of medical practice: toward a philosophy and ethic of the healing professions. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981.
46.
Edwards SJL , Kirchin S., Huxtable R.Research ethics committees and paternalism . J Med Ethics2004; 30: 88—91.
47.
Garrard E., Dawson A.What is the role of the research ethics committee? Paternalism, inducements and harm in research ethics. J Med Ethics2005; 31: 419—23.
48.
de Raeve L.Nursing research. An ethical and legal appraisal. London : Baillière Tindall, 1996 .
49.
Kristjanson L. , Hanson F., Balneaves I.Research in palliative care populations: ethical issues. J Palliat Care1994; 10: 10—15.
50.
Randall F., Downie RSPalliative care ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
51.
Johnson M.Real-world ethics and nursing research. Nurs Times Res2004; 9: 251—61.
52.
Casarett DJ , Karlawish JHT.Are special ethical guidelines needed for palliative care research?J Pain Symptom Manage2000; 20: 133—39.
53.
Addington-Hall J.Research sensitivities to palliative care patients. Eur J Cancer Care2000; 11: 220—24.
54.
Penrod JD, Morrison RSChallenges for palliative care research. J Palliat Med2004; 7: 398—402.
55.
Buss MK, Arnold RMChallenges in palliative care research: one experience. J Palliat Med2004; 7: 405—407.
56.
Terry W., Olson G., Ravenscroft P., Wilss L., Boulton-Lewis G.Hospice patients' views on research in palliative care. Intern Med J2006; 36: 406—13.
57.
Purdy IBVulnerable: a concept analysis. Nurs Forum2004; 39: 25—33.
58.
Spiers J.New perspectives on vulnerability using emic and etic approaches. J Adv Nurs2000; 31: 715—21.
59.
Part D.Experiences of ethics committees; a difference of value bases [Letter] . BMJ2006; 332: 730.
60.
Brody BAQuality of scholarship in bioethics. J Med Philos1990; 15: 161—78.
61.
Clouser Danner K, Gert B.A critique of principlism. J Med Philos1990; 15: 219—36.
62.
Englehardt HTThe foundations of bioethics. New York: University Press, 1986 .
Lee S., Kristjanson L.Human research ethics committees: issues in palliative care research . Int J Palliat Nurs2003; 9: 13—18.
65.
Bailey C., Froggatt K., Field D., Krishnasamy M.The nursing contribution to qualitative research in palliative care 1990—1999: a critical evaluation. J Adv Nurs2002; 40: 48—60.
66.
Tod AM, Nicolson P., Allmark P.Ethical review of health services research in the UK: implications for nursing . J Adv Nurs2002; 40: 379—86.
67.
Howarth ML, Kneafsey R.The impact of research governance in healthcare and higher education organizations . J Adv Nurs2005; 49: 675—83.
68.
Vachon MLS.The nurse's role: the world of palliative care nursing. In: Ferrell BR, Coyle N eds. Textbook of palliative nursing . Oxford: Oxford University Press , 2001: 647—62.
69.
Clark D., Seymour J eds.Reflections on palliative care. Buckingham: Open University Press, 1999.
70.
Higginson I. , Wade A., McCarthy M.Palliative care: views of patients and their families. BMJ1990; 301: 277—80.
