The Older Adult as a Research Participant: Are Ethic Review Committees too Protectionistic?

Abstract

In this paper, we explore the ways in which we can better understand how university-based ethic review committees, and the protocols associated with research that include older adults, both help and hinder research, and how decisions can be shaped by and contribute towards narratives of ageism. Conceptions of what it means to age are rooted in historic biomedical ideas about the body, in juxtaposition to a richer understanding of the lifespan, history and diversity, intersectionality, and social determinants of health. This paper explores how decisions made within ethic review committees in universities may be seen to protect older adults from unethical research practices and associated harms, and though well-intentioned, contribute towards the reproduction of ageist discourses and what it means to grow older, to be vulnerable, and to be in need of protection. This paper draws insights gained from twenty years of research in multi-national, provincial, and local teams, teaching all levels of aging related courses at a local university, and work in the community. This research has been located in Canada where the Tri-Council Policy Guidelines require all research that includes human subjects to be approved a priori through a local research ethic review committee.