d Informed consent

Researchers are responsible for ensuring that participants in projects do not come to physical or psychological harm as a result of academic activities (Denscombe 2010).

During fieldwork for this project I ensured that homeless colleagues were fully aware that information we recorded might be reproduced (for example, in field notes, as a paper in a journal or photograph in a magazine). Concern over how publication of research material might affect participants is not a new concern, as Barnes noted in 1967:

‘…anthropologists need to be aware that there is a significant difference between public knowledge circulating orally in a community and stories appearing in print’

(Barnes 1967, cited in Caplan 2003:6)

Therefore it was essential that I obtained informed consent from everyone who chose to work with me. This was at times problematic. For example, the presence of paper consent forms actively discouraged homeless people from working with me in Bristol and York. I chose instead to explain verbally that I was an archaeologist interested in the heritage of homelessness which I intended to attempt to document through photographs, maps, memories, journeys and through film and audio and that these materials would likely be published and exhibited variously. A comment from a homeless man who wished to remain anonymous illustrates a commonly

encountered problem:

‘…I don’t mind helping out… [the project] seems quite interesting… I don’t want my face printed in a magazine that’s saying I’m a tramp or a street drinker… to my kids, I’m their absent dad and I wouldn’t want them to see me like this….It would kill them to see me like this!’

When informed about the intended use of data colleagues typically reacted in one of three ways: 1) the person said they were not comfortable with arrangements and

chose to avoid the project 2) the person said they were happy to take part but did not want their real name used or photograph taken or 3) the person agreed to take part and was comfortable being identified in publications. In all cases, I fully respected the decision of the individual. I also reiterated that participation in the project would be undertaken as voluntary action (Denscombe 2010) and that all colleagues were entitled to leave the project at any time with no repercussions. Those colleagues who stayed with the project to its conclusion were happy to be photographed and actively wanted to be named in publications and presentations, the project having become a source of pride and associated with a sense of personal achievement, the full impact of which will be unpacked later in the thesis (see Chapter Eight)¹³.

4.1e Working with people under the influence of drugs or alcohol Many homeless people with whom I worked had consumed alcohol or drugs (pharmaceutical or illegal). All interactions I had with homeless people were

voluntary, that is, no-one was coerced, contracted or forced to work with me. Part of working with homeless people on their heritage necessarily involved the

development of methodologies contingent upon working with people who might have consumed a large volume of drugs or alcohol, these being a significant feature of contemporary homeless landscapes in Britain. To exclude those who had

consumed drugs or alcohol from the project would be to exclude the very people with whom I set out to work (see also Chapter Nine). Ethnographic research undertaken for this thesis involved walking, talking, drawing and speaking into a microphone, none of which are made hazardous if a person has consumed alcohol or drugs. I found that those who had consumed crack cocaine were not interested in speaking with an archaeologist or discussing heritage whereas people who had consumed alcohol and/or heroin were more likely to wish to engage.

13 In one case, Andrew Dafnis, the project was cited as the direct reason Andrew started to use his real name again having been known only as Smiler for almost 30 years.

A further consideration is the effect that drugs and alcohol have on perception of place. As a primary aim of this thesis was to document landscapes as perceived by homeless people the inclusion of perspectives according to those who had consumed drugs and alcohol and the material function of substances in bringing about

perceived changes to environment was crucial (see also Chapter Five). It was

essential that methodologies were developed for working with people ‘as they were’

rather than expecting homeless colleagues to conform to more traditional work patterns or modify their behaviour in order to ‘fit in’ with normative archaeological practice.

4.1f Privacy

Throughout fieldwork homeless people took me to places to which they felt emotional attachment (Byrne & Nugent 2004) which demanded that I fully respect peoples’ privacy. Several times, we came to a place described by colleagues as a social place and found people asleep. In these cases, we did not disturb the sleeping people or take photographs that might identify them.

Here, sociologist John Barnes is instructive:

‘Social research entails the possibility of destroying the privacy and autonomy of the individual, of producing more ammunition to those already in power, of laying the groundwork for an invincibly oppressive state’ (Barnes 1963: 22)

Addiction and shop lifting feature in many homeless landscapes and assemblages.

However, it was important that research did not add to the overburden negative

‘cultural image’ of homelessness in an unbalanced manner (Rosenthal 2000, Hopper 2003). Some sites recorded showed materiality suggestive of illegal behaviour (for example, security tags, empty wallets and drug paraphernalia). All effort was made to accurately and authentically represent what homeless colleagues shared with me

without impinging on individual peoples’ privacy or unfairly attributing certain action or behaviour to all homeless people.