IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socres/v26y2021i4p942-958.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutional Ethics Challenges to Sex Work Researchers: Committees, Communities, and Collaboration

Author

Listed:
  • Monique Huysamen

    (Manchester Metropolitan University, UK)

  • Teela Sanders

    (University of Leicester, UK)

Abstract

Doing research in the field of sex work studies throws up challenges. Among these are the restrictions and regulatory issues placed on researchers by institutional ethical review processes. We draw on academic research and our personal experiences as two researchers who have been involved with many sex work research projects to illustrate how sex work researchers face a set of challenges relating to ethics – we define these as institutional ethics challenges rather than ethical challenges. They are the challenges associated with applying for and obtaining ethical approval from research institutions and funders to conduct research on stigmatised and potentially criminalised topics. This article has three aims. First, to discuss the institutional ethics challenges that sex work researchers may encounter when applying for ethical clearance. Second, to assist researchers in making a case for their research by communicating the value of doing research on sex work in contexts where it remains criminalised and by placing the assumed risks associated with sex work research into perspective. Finally, to offer a pathway forward regarding how, guided by co-produced research protocols, researchers and sex work Communities can find common ground for good practice to enhance collaboration and foster genuinely ethical research.

Suggested Citation

  • Monique Huysamen & Teela Sanders, 2021. "Institutional Ethics Challenges to Sex Work Researchers: Committees, Communities, and Collaboration," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 26(4), pages 942-958, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:26:y:2021:i:4:p:942-958
    DOI: 10.1177/13607804211002847
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/13607804211002847
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/13607804211002847?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:26:y:2021:i:4:p:942-958. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.