Abstract
For decades, prisoners were used as participants in various medical and social experiments, and hardly any ethical regulations applied to studies carried out in prison settings. However, recent studies are more considerate of ethics in prisoner research, and the general view is that prisoners should be treated like any other group of research participants. This includes ensuring that their rights to privacy and confidentiality are ensured throughout the study. The present paper aims to discuss the applicability of confidentiality and privacy provisions to prison research by addressing both the general rules regarding confidentiality of information in research and the specific considerations that apply to prisoner research.
Introduction
Research involving human subjects is one of the most debated types of research today due to the many ethical issues surrounding it. Among the most crucial ethical concerns, in this case, are the consequences of the study for the participant’s health and wellbeing, as well as the protection of his or her rights throughout the duration of the experiment. This includes obtaining informed consent for the use of all data and maintaining the respondent’s privacy and confidentiality both during and after the study: “Federal regulations require that research involving human subjects includes adequate provisions to protect the privacy interests of participants and to maintain the confidentiality of data” (OSU, 2016, p. 1).
In the case of research involving prisoners, these concerns are especially pressing, because in institutional settings, it is harder to establish the exact borders between confidential data and information that can be disclosed under certain circumstances (Gostin, Vanchieri, & Pope, 2007). The proposed scenario for the present assignment is that during an interview, a respondent who is imprisoned discloses information regarding a potential breakout. This situation creates a major ethical dilemma for the researcher as it requires a thorough understanding of the extent to which confidentiality must be maintained in the given setting.
Confidentiality and Privacy in Research
There is currently a significant number of guidelines that qualified researchers have to follow to ensure the correct protocol for their experiments and studies. Columbia University (n.d.) argues that the need to protect subjects’ information and privacy is particularly relevant to the modern research setting: “With growing dependence on computers, the Internet, and the need for databases and registries, protection of an individual’s privacy is now one of the greatest challenges in research” (par. 1). Indeed, the regulations on participant privacy and confidentiality have evolved dramatically over the past several years.
Fouka and Mantzorou (2011) state that today, “Confidentiality and anonymity is closely connected with the rights of beneficence, respect for the dignity and fidelity” (p. 6). This requires researchers to embed confidentiality practices into the design of their experiments, for instance, by making no connection between a respondent’s answers and his or her identity (Fouka and Mantzorou, 2011).
Typical procedures for the protection of privacy and confidentiality also involve obtaining the respondent’s informed consent for the use of information for the specific purposes of the study (Kaiser, 2009). In addition, researchers must ensure that they only collect information that is required and that they store private data confidentially by using identification numbers instead of the participants’ real names (Guraya, London, & Guraya, 2014).
At the federal level, there are regulations that allow the researcher to refuse to share the respondent’s information; however, these, too, are mainly limited to identifying information about the research participant; for instance, the Certificate of Confidentiality, issued by the National Institutes of Health, allows the researcher to deny access to “identifying information on research participants in any civil, criminal, administrative, legislative, or other proceeding, whether at the federal, state, or local level, unless the participant consents” (University of Columbia, n.d., para. 2.3). However, most laws on confidentiality provide exceptions in cases where there is evidence of child or elder abuse or communicable diseases or if there is a threat to the safety of the respondent or other people (OSU, 2016).
Ethical Considerations in Research Involving Prisoners
In the case of prisoner research, ethical concerns are even more pressing. Prisoners are the prototypical example of a captive population, and they are “an especially vulnerable class of potential research participants who historically have been exploited by physicians and researchers seeking expedient solutions to complex research problems” (Gostin et al., 2007, p. 21). The protection of prisoners’ rights in research settings, therefore, becomes critical for the study to be considered ethical.
The central aspect of ensuring the universal and consistent ethical protection of prisoners during research is maintaining respect for their human rights and concern for their health and wellbeing (Gostin et al., 2007). At the most basic level, ethical provisions require researchers to treat prisoners like any other group of research participants, despite their low social and economic status. Thus, researchers must ensure that the standard practices for ensuring privacy and confidentiality, including obtaining informed consent and refusing to share identifying information, apply to prisoner research to the same extent as any other type of research setting (Gostin et al., 2007).
The Proposed Scenario
In the proposed scenario, disclosing the information leaked by the prisoner would be a violation of the prisoner’s right to privacy. In most cases, such a violation would fail to comply with ethical research regulations (Reiter, 2009), which means that sharing the information would threaten the ethical validity of the study and lead to issues in the researcher’s further studies. However, prison breaks do pose a serious threat to the safety and security of other people.
For instance, both correctional officers and the prisoners themselves could be injured in the process. Moreover, if the prisoners are violent, their breakout could pose a significant threat to the lives and wellbeing of civilians. Therefore, in the present scenario, the information could be disclosed to an authorized person without the loss of ethical validity on the basis of federal research regulations that allow for the disclosure of personal information if it contains evidence of a threat to the life and health of the participant or other people. I would rely on this provision to inform prison authorities of the threat, thus possibly preventing the prison break while at the same time maintaining the ethical validity of the study.
Conclusion
Overall, privacy and confidentiality are major concerns in prisoner research. In most circumstances, prisoners should be treated with the same degree of consideration and respect as any other group of research participants. However, I believe that the proposed scenario should be considered an exception to the general confidentiality rule and that the information should be disclosed to authorities to prevent the imminent threat to the lives and health of people, including the prisoners themselves, the correctional officers, and general civilians.
References
Fouka, G., & Mantzorou, M. (2011). What are the major ethical Issues in conducting research? Is there a conflict between the research ethics and the nature of nursing? Health Science Journal, 5(1), 3-14.
Gostin, L. O., Vanchieri, C., & Pope, A. (2007). Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on ethical considerations for revisions to DHHS Regulations for protection of prisoners involved in research. Washington (DC): National Academies Press.
Guraya, S. Y., London, N. J. M., & Guraya, S. S. (2014). Ethics in medical research. Journal of Microscopy and Ultrastructure 2(3), 121-126. Web.
Kasier, K. (2009). Protecting respondent confidentiality in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 19(11): 1632–1641. Web.
The Ohio State University (OSU). (2016). Privacy and confidentiality. Human Research Protection Program, 18(1), 1-5.
Reiter, K. (2009). Experimentation on prisoners: Persistent dilemmas in rights and regulations. California Law Review, 97(2), 501-566. Web.
University of Columbia (n.d.). Privacy and Confidentiality. CIRE Current Issues in Research Ethics. Web.