Ethical Tensions Resulting from Interpreter Involvement in the Consent Process

Amelia Barwise, Richard Sharp, Jessica Hirsch

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

We describe how our institution responded when an interpreter who participated in the consent process involving an individual with limited English proficiency refused to cosign consent documents attesting that the individual enrolling in the study understood the consent information and that her consent to enroll was voluntary. In developing our approach, our institution took into account ethical tensions between the Belmont principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice that apply to the protection of research participants and the professional principles of beneficence, fidelity, and respect for the importance of culture that are outlined in ethical guidelines for medical interpreters.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)31-35
Number of pages5
JournalEthics & human research
Volume41
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2019

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • human subjects research
  • informed consent
  • limited English proficiency
  • medical interpreters
  • translation

Cite this