Scenario 3 - health & criminal records data linked by experts | |
---|---|
Consent justifications | No consent justifications |
Sensitivity of data requires that consent be obtained (2)a | Acceptable practice because of the benefits (15) |
The more sensitive the data, the greater the need to obtain consent (2) | Use of de-identified data does not require consent (12) |
Practical considerations of obtaining consent from thousands (5) | |
People have right to choose (1) | Given the difficulties in obtaining consent, it is best to conduct research as benefits would be great (4) |
Not seeking consent infringes privacy (1) | |
Consent should be sought for all research (1) | Research focusing on issues such as violence, which affects others/the whole community, justifies not obtaining consent (3) |
Mental health issues do not warrant not obtaining consent from participant or authorised carer (1) | Strict measures/guidelines provide protection (2) |
The need for large number of participants is no excuse for not considering obtaining consent (1) | Acceptable to do mental health research without consent (2) |
Consent not very important where safety issues are concerned (2) | |
Research involving ‘vulnerable’ people requires consent (1) | When you weigh up individual vs. community benefits, community benefits here are greater (1) |
If there is a legal guardian, consent should probably be sought (1) | No harm to individuals because they will not be named (or ‘outed’) (1) |
No impact on participants, who will be unaware that their data were used (1) | |
Some participants cannot consent (1) | |
Trying to get consent (including from relatives) could delay research, which | |
should be done promptly because if its nature (1) | |
Some participants may not have guardians (1) |