vulnerable populations, research design, informed consent, justice, incentives, COVID-19 impact, qualitative study, refugee and asylum seekers, Rohingya
To date, Malaysia hosts approximately 182,000 refugees and asylum-seekers (RAS) registered with the United Nation High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).1 While the exact number of unregistered RAS remains elusive, the majority of RAS come from Myanmar, with the biggest group comprising the Rohingyas, followed by Chins and other ethnic minorities.2 RAS have limited access to health care and education, are prohibited from formal employment, and face arbitrary arrests and extortion on a regular basis.
The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected marginalized populations in Malaysia, including refugees, migrant workers, older adults, and Indigenous communities.3 Refugees—particularly the Rohingyas—were among the most negatively affected. Media reports showed that many Rohingya (who mostly resided in urban areas of the Malaysian Peninsula) not only lost their jobs and income sources, but also became victims of xenophobia, racism, hate speech, and sporadic violence during the peak of the pandemic.4
A team of researchers led by local principal investigator (PI) wanted to conduct a qualitative study on how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the Rohingya community in Kuala Lumpur. They aimed to qualitatively explore and understand the lived experiences of this population amid this global health crisis and how this group coped with the challenges. In order to identify potential respondents, the PI first contacted a local nongovernmental organization (NGO) that had been actively serving the Rohingya community. She also sought help from an international organization that provided services for refugees to connect her to local Rohingya community leaders.
The research team then organized a meeting with respondents (interviewees) at the researchers’ offices. Here, they explained to the study participants the aim and procedures of the study in both the local Malay and English languages. Verbal and written consent was obtained from each respondent. Two weeks later, the PI and her team conducted in-depth interviews with the respondents, who comprised adult males and females. Some of the interviews were held at the respondents’ homes, while some were conducted at the researchers’ offices. A small compensation in the form of basic food items were given to all study respondents. After the data collection was completed, another meeting was held in which the researchers discussed with respondents (refugees) their aspirations and expectations related to use of the study findings.
Questions
What are some of the central ethical considerations that the researchers need to be mindful of when conducing a research study with a refugee population in general and during the COVID-19 pandemic?
What ethical concerns emerge from the way the researchers obtained consent from the study respondents? Was it appropriate to use the local Malay and English languages? Could power dynamics affect the consent-taking process? Explain your answer.
What do you think about the recruitment strategy? How might the researcher improve the approach?
Was it appropriate for the research team to conduct the interviews at their offices and participants’ homes? Why or why not?
Was the incentive appropriate? Why or why not?
