Ethical considerations

The data collection was carried out in line with research ethical guidelines developed by The National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (NESH), and its research design was approved by the Norwegian Social Science Data Services (NSD). The project was also advised by NESH on the interview participation of minors. Research that includes war-affected asylum-seeking children as interviewees poses more ethical challenges due to the vulnerability of these children than research including interviews with professionals and practitioners. The following section on ethical considerations therefore focuses mainly on issues involving vulnerable children as research participants.

Interviews with minors: Many scholars have highlighted the complexities associated with the

recruitment of children as respondents in research projects (Powell & Smith 2009; Curtis et al. 2004; Campbell 2008). The difficulty seems to increase with the marginalization of the given youth category and the sensitivity of the research topic (Powell & Smith 2009). Access to child interviewees is at times obstructed by gatekeepers like parents, social workers, teachers, child welfare workers and the like, the motivation often being a wish to protect the child against what they believe could be an uncomfortable situation for the child. At other times, the child him/herself does not want to participate. For asylum-seeking children, this could be linked to uncertainty with the asylum case, and the fear that an honest interview with the

37

researcher could negatively affect their chances of obtaining a residence permit. The difficult transit period may in itself be a reason for not wanting to participate. Lack of confidence in adults in general may be another reason. To avoid that research interviews could be experienced as resembling the asylum interview, interviews were conducted in an informal setting at the UAM-homes/centres, questions were posed in a friendly and sensitive manner and interviewees were well informed about the purpose of the interview.

Although access may be difficult, many children also appear to have a wish to talk about their situation and life conditions, at least as long as the researcher is able to build a relationship of confidence and a comfortable atmosphere of frank exchange and openness. If these conditions are present, research participation can in fact be empowering (Tonheim 2013). Boyden (2000: 2) argues that this is especially the case for ―(…) children who have suffered torment and oppression, for the researcher may be the first person to really listen to their problems and take their concerns seriously.‖

The reasoning for including children as interviewees is, firstly, that we see them as being most knowledgeable about their specific life situation and needs. Secondly, we wish to honour their right to be heard in matters affecting their lives (UN 1989, Art. 12), to be able to voice their opinions on how rehabilitation and social reintegration interventions should be organized and implemented to best meet their needs. We are fully aware that war-affected children are a very heterogeneous group and that their experiences may be quite different. Nonetheless, we still believe that the stories and views of the youths we talked to made a valuable contribution to the project, particularly as it allowed us to better understand their everyday situation.

Informed consent: The project ensured the research sample comprehensive information on the

aim of the research, how its results would be used, as well as information on the possibility to refuse to participate, refuse to answer particular questions, and prematurely end the interview if desired. Except for the expert interviews, written informed consents were obtained from all other interviewees. The informed consent document to the youths was written in a child- friendly language and presented both verbally and orally to the child interviewees. As children may find it difficult to understand how the research results can and should be used (Eide 2012), the interviewer therefore assured that child interviewees understood the purpose and the use of the research by asking them questions as to allow them to express their understanding of it in their own words. The interviewer was also sensitive to non-verbal communication and reactions to questions posed in order to interpret whether the interviewee was comfortable or not about his or her participation. In two interviews, where the young person had recently received bad news which clearly impacted on their state of mind, the right to withdraw from the interview was repeated during the interview. However, both chose to complete the interview.

Confidentiality: To preserve the anonymity of respondents is in most type of research

considered an ethical prerequisite. This is particularly the case when the research topic is of a sensitive nature. This project therefore guaranteed the children and parents who participate in the project complete confidentiality in the dissemination of results. Before starting the interview participants were informed that if the interview revealed anything that may indicate

38

child maltreatment or abuse or any other form for criminal activity the researcher would be obliged by law to notify proper authorities (Child welfare services, police etc.). No information which indicated child maltreatment or criminal activity was revealed during interviews.

The informed consent to practitioners informed them that their workplace as well as profession would be mentioned in the dissemination, while their names would not. Expert interviewees, as more public figures, were informed that their viewpoints would be linked to their name, to which they also agreed.

Professional follow-up: There is a risk that the research interview may bring back ‗forgotten‘

and painful memories (flashbacks), particularly if the interviewee normally tends to keep these things locked up inside or has nobody to speak to. Although it may be healthy and release tension to talk, it may also cause the person to relive past sufferings. It was therefore discussed with the practitioners recruiting the child interviewees, in most cases social workers or psychologists, that they would observe whether a follow-up conversation would be necessary. We are not aware of whether such conversations took place or not.