This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by O'Connell Davidson, J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

If no means no, does yes mean yes? Consenting to research intimacies

School of Sociology and Social Policy, Faculty of Social Sciences, Law and Education, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK, julia.o'connelldavidson{at}nottingham.ac.uk

This article reflects on some ethical dilemmas presented by an ethnographic study of prostitution that I conducted in the 1990s. The study drew one research subject into a long and very close relationship with me, and though she was an active and fully consenting participant in the research, she was also objectified within both the field relationship and the textual products it generated. This kind of contradiction has been recognized and discussed as a more general problem for ethnography by feminist and critical ethnographers. In this article it is considered specifically in relation to informed consent as an ethical issue. If an ethnographer secures the free and informed consent of a research subject, does this necessarily make the intimacy of their subsequent relationship ethical? Is it possible for anyone to genuinely consent to being objectified through the research process?

Key Words: care • ethics • ethnography • informed consent • prostitution

History of the Human Sciences, Vol. 21, No. 4, 49-67 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/0952695108095511


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?