In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

275 Chapter 19 Commentary: An Overview of Human Subjects Research in Biological Anthropology Jeffrey C. Long Ethical practice of research involving human subjects has become increasingly topical over the past several decades. This trend began with the recognition of egregious violations of human rights in Nazi medical experiments. It was also sparked by serious human rights violations in the United States, as exemplified by the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment. However, the concern for research ethics arises from more than these failures. It also owes to the fact that there is more research funding available now than ever before, and that research is inextricably bound to public interest because it is paid for by the public and embedded in public education and health. Research in all disciplines of physical, natural, and social sciences has an impact on individuals and society, and no aspect of science or research is exempt from ethical concerns. It is appropriate that physical anthropologists hold symposia and identify both crucial ethical concerns and state of the art practices. There are three ethical principles that guide human subjects regulations in the United States today: justice, beneficence, and respect. These principles are fully articulated in 1979 in the Belmont Report to Congress. Succinctly stated, justice requires that the benefits and burdens of research are fairly distributed; beneficence requires that benefits are maximized and harms are minimized; respect requires that subjects are informed about the particular protocol and participation is voluntary. These principles provide a framework for understanding the broader implications of the individual contributions to this volume. It is immediately apparent from reading these papers that anthropological research presents unique challenges. There is often a large gap between researcher and research subject in education and socioeconomic status. This 276 Jeffrey C. Long translates into several difficulties. First, it is difficult to explain research goals and methods outside of the university and our own cultural setting, but informed consent is a vital aspect of respect and a necessary component of ethical research. Second, researchers must prevent subtle use of their nationality , university affiliation, or access to material goods to influence participation . Third, researchers must ensure that the distribution of risks and benefits is equitable. New knowledge should serve to benefit those studied as well as those studying. Finally, the researcher may not be adequately prepared to assess the unique constellation of cultural and environmental circumstances that translate into risks and benefits to the research participant. The chapter by Sara Stinson presents an informative overview of the principles of ethics, the workings of an institutional review board (IRB), and her practical experience as a human biologist. She accurately points out that behavioral research encompasses dangers that are generally under appreciated . These include the potential for loss of confidentiality, which can ultimately lead to embarrassment or stigmatization. This risk may be greater in the anthropological setting where it is impossible to conduct private interviews or a language barrier necessitates using a translator. In addition to the dangers pointed out by Dr. Stinson, it should be noted that the topics and questions central to behavioral health are often related to high-risk behaviors and traumatic events. Some behavioral interviews contain sensitive questions that are culturally inappropriate or can trigger severe emotional distress. These may detect evidence of illegal activity or child abuse that the researcher is required to report to legal authorities. Both the researcher and the participant should be aware of these possibilities. The project reported by Cynthia Winston and Rick Kittles stands out well in regard to serving the community of research participants. It combines the expertise of a psychologist, an ethicist, and a geneticist to study the use of genetic markers for tracing the ancestry of African Americans to their African homeland. The project is ambitious because genetic markers record history imperfectly and the ultimate psychosocial impact is presently uncertain. Yet, the research is directly aimed at benefiting the participants. It is extremely interesting that the African American respondents in their study were more interested in issues related to ancestry than in issues related to health. This project is a nearly unique example of anthropological genetic research being conducted in the context of African American defined goals, priorities, and values. Sloan R. Williams deftly illustrates that unforeseen research risks can arise. She achieves this in the context of a recent genetic paternity analysis that examined the putative relationship between Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings. This is an emotional topic because Hemings was Jefferson’s slave and his deceased wife’s half...

Share