View/Open - Dalhousie University

5.6.4 Ethical Considerations in Protecting Study Participants
All participants were asked several times if they were taking part freely, and if
they had any questions, concerns, or hesitations about taking part. Any such hesitations
and questions were discussed openly; however, these generally related to scheduling
and time commitments and individuals’ own questions regarding whether or not they
met the eligibility criteria. No concerns that were raised related to intra-agency
conflicts, a desire for anonymity specifically within the program, or fears of
repercussions. Rather, all fourteen participants’ comments and sentiments consistently
reflected a great deal of collegiality, mutual respect, and appreciation among and
between staff and volunteers; and a dedication to the program and the families,
volunteers, and staff involved.
One example of a step I took to ensure ethical practices occurred during the
design phase. I asked some paid home visitors in my local area, each of whom had had
experience dealing with strained worker-management relationships, for advice on the
most ethical way to recruit paid home visitors as study participants. Considering that
this work is their livelihood, I wanted to ensure that the research did not have a
negative impact on study participants’ employment status. The home visitors’
unanimous response was that paid home visitors should not be approached by their
supervisor, and that protecting participants’ identity within their own agency should be
built into the study design. These concerns were reflected in the study design,
participant documents, and instructions to each of the three Agency Contact Persons.
I took extra care with the matter of identifying study participants. The
information sent to potential participants (Appendices E, F, and G) stressed that,
although all efforts would be made to maintain confidentiality and anonymity
throughout the research, participants may be identifiable to some readers due to small
participant numbers, and to the fact that each program would be named. These risks
were also discussed with each participant prior to each interview. Where relevant,
participants and I discussed how certain information was to be presented, and whether
73