Redwood, S., 2005. Colliding discourses: deconstructing the process of seeking ethical approval for a participatory evaluation project. Journal of Research in Nursing, 10 (2), pp. 217-230.
Full text not available from this repository.
Official URL: http://jrn.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/10/2/217
The aim of this paper is to bring to the surface issues of power and authority in the process of seeking ethical approval for health service research in the UK in relation to the dominant discourse about methods to generate data and results that constitute legitimate ‘evidence’. In order to demonstrate how alternative and competing discourses may be silenced, I offer a deconstructive readings of the term ‘evidence’ as applied to healthcare, and excerpts of policy documents, which provide the framework for the ethical review of research proposals. I debate how the discourse shaped my own experience of seeking ethical approval for a participatory evaluation project involving Consultant Nurses. Furthermore, I engage in a dialogue with other texts in the literature in order to open up possible patterns and to generate alternative explanations and discourses which seek to promote constructive dialogue rather than regulation.
|Subjects:||Technology > Medicine and Health > Nursing and Midwifery|
|Group:||School of Health and Social Care > Centre for Qualitative Research|
|Deposited By:||INVALID USER|
|Deposited On:||04 Jan 2008|
|Last Modified:||07 Mar 2013 14:36|
|Repository Staff Only -|
|BU Staff Only -|
|Help Guide -||Editing Your Items in BURO|