"There is No Black or White": Scientific Community Views on Ethics in Intellectual and Developmental Disability Research

Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities

Volumn 9, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 206-214

  Mcdonald, Katherine ^a   Patka, Mazna ^b  

^a SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Developmental disabilities; Ethics review boards; Human research ethics; Inclusion; Intellectual disabilities; Research participation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84866170465     PISSN: 17411122     EISSN: 17411130     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1741-1130.2012.00348.x     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Aldridge, J. (2007). Picture this: The use of participatory photographic research methods with people with learning disabilities. Disability & Society, 22, 1-17.
2. Alessandra, T. (n.d.). The platinum rule. Retrieved August 15, 2011, from http://www.squarewheels.com/articles2/platinum.html
3. American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. (2012). Definition of intellectual disability. Retrieved from http://www.aamr.org/content_100.cfm?navID=21
4. Arscott, K., Dagnan, D., & Kroese, B. S. (1998). Consent to psychological research by people with an intellectual disability. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 11, 77-83.
5. Becker, H., Roberts, G., Morrison, J., & Silver, J. (2004). Recruiting people with disabilities as research participants: Challenges and strategies to address them. Mental Retardation, 42, 471-475.
6. Brigham, L. (1998). Representing the lives of women with learning difficulties: Ethical dilemmas in the research process. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, 146-150.
7. Brodin, J., & Renblad, K. (2000). Ethical reflections in research on persons with intellectual disabilities. Technology and Disability, 13, 151-159.
8. Cameron, L., & Murphy, J. (2006). Obtaining consent to participate in research: The issues involved in including people with a range of learning and communication disabilities. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 113-120.
9. Clegg, J. (1999). Ethics and intellectual disability. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 12, 537-541.
10. Clegg, J. (2004). Practice in focus: A hermeneutic approach to research ethics. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 186-190.
11. Coleman, C., Menikoff, J., Goldner, J., & Dubler, N. (2005). The ethics and regulations of research with human subjects. Newark, NJ: LexisNexis.
12. Dalton, A. J., & McVilly, K. R. (2004). Ethics guidelines for international multicenter research involving people with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 1, 57-70.
13. DeRenzo, E. G. (1997). Decisionally impaired persons in research: Refining the proposed refinements. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 25, 139-149.
14. Dye, L., Hare, D. J., & Hendy, S. (2003). Factors impacting on the capacity to consent in people with learning disabilities. Tizard Learning Disability Review, 8, 11-20.
15. Dye, L., Hendy, S., Hare, D. J., & Burton, M. (2004). Capacity to consent to participate in research-A recontextualization. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 144-150.
16. Dye, L., Hare, D. J., & Hendy, S. (2007). Capacity of people with intellectual disabilities to consent to take part in a research study. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 20, 168-174.
17. Fisher, C. B., Cea, C. D., Davidson, P. W., & Fried, A. L. (2006). Capacity of persons with mental retardation to consent to participate in randomized clinical trials. American Journal of Psychiatry, 163, 1813-1820.
18. Freedman, R. I. (2001). Ethical challenges in the conduct of research involving persons with mental retardation. Mental Retardation, 39, 130-141.
19. Gates, B., & Waight, M. (2007). Reflections on conducting focus groups with people with learning disabilities: Theoretical and practical issues. Journal of Research in Nursing, 12, 111-126.
20. Gilbert, T. (2004). Involving people with learning disabilities in research: Issues and possibilities. Health & Social Care in the Community, 12, 298-308.
21. Ham, M., Jones, N., Mansell, I., Northway, R., Price, L., & Walker, G. (2004). "I'm a researcher!" Working together to gain ethical approval for a participatory research study. Journal of Leading Disabilities, 8, 397-407.
22. Hayes, G. J., Hayes, S. C., & Dykstra, T. (1995). A survey of university Institutional Review Boards: Characteristics, policies, and procedures. IRB: Ethics and Human Research, 17, 1-6.
23. Iacono, T. (2006). Ethical challenges and complexities of including people with intellectual disability as participants in research. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 31, 173-179.
24. Iacono, T., & Murray, V. (2002). Issues of informed consent in conducting medical research involving people with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 15, 41-52.
25. Kancelbaum, B. (2002). Social scientists and institutional review boards. Social Science Research Council, 3, 1-5.
26. Keith-Spiegel, P., Koocher, G. P., & Tabachnick, B. (2006). What scientists want from their research ethics review board. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 1, 67-82.
27. Kitchin, R. (2000). The researched opinions on research: Disabled people and disability research. Disability & Society, 15, 25-47.
28. Lai, R., Elliot, D., & Ouellette-Kuntz, H. (2006). Attitudes of research ethics review board members toward individuals with intellectual disabilities: The need for more research. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 3, 114-118.
29. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
30. Malott, R. W. (2002). Notes from a radical behaviorist: Is it morally defensible to use the developmentally disabled as guinea pigs? Behavior and Social Issues, 11, 105-106.
31. McCarthy, M. (1998). Interviewing people with learning disabilities about sensitive topics: A discussion of ethical issues. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, 140-145.
32. McDonald, K., & Keys, C. (2008). How the powerful decide: Access to research participation for those at the margins. American Journal of Community Psychology, 42, 79-93.
33. McDonald, K., & Kidney, C. (2012). What's right? Ethics in intellectual disabilities research. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 9, 27-39.
34. McDonald, K., Keys, C., & Henry, D. (2008). The gatekeepers of science: Attitudes toward the research participation of adults with intellectual disabilities. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 113, 466-478.
35. McDonald, K., Kidney, C., Nelms, S., Parker, M., Kimmel, A., & Keys, C. (2009). Including adults with intellectual disabilities in research: Scientists' perceptions of risk and protections. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 6, 244-252.
36. McDonald, K., Kidney, C., & Patka, M. (2012). "You need to let your voice be heard": Research participants' views on research. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, [Advance online publication] doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2788.2011.01527.x
37. McManus, J., Feyes, K., & Saucier, D. (2011). Contact and knowledge as predictors of attitudes toward individuals with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 2, 579-590.
38. McVilly, K., & Dalton, A. (2006). Commentary on Iacono (2006): "Ethical challenges and complexities of including people with intellectual disability as participants in research." Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 31, 186-188.
39. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
40. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (1979). Belmont report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protections of human subjects of research. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
41. Nicolaidis, C., Raymaker, R., McDonald, K., Robertson, S., Dern, S., & Ashkenzy, E. (2011). Collaboration strategies in non-traditional CBPR partnerships: Lessons from a geographically-dispersed partnership with autistic self-advocates. Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action, 5, 143-150.
42. Pledger, C. (2003). Discourse on disability and rehabilitation issue: Opportunity for psychology. The American Psychologist, 58, 279-284.
43. Shapiro, J. (1994). No pity: People with disabilities forging a new civil rights movement. New York: Three Rivers Press.
44. Stalker, K. (1998). Some ethical and methodological issues in research with people with learning difficulties. Disability & Society, 13, 5-19.
45. Yan, E., & Munir, K. (2004). Regulatory and ethical principles in research involving children and individuals with developmental disabilities. Ethics & Behavior, 14, 31-49.