Come on Jon, don't let the bureaucrats control where, and with who, we do our research - we are perfectly capable as researchers of assuring anonymity and being loyal to both our project participants and our academic institutions. The fact that many of these people are, as you say, the "most miserable groups of workers in the UK" is exactly why we should be out there working with them to give them a voice, even if it has to be through us, in anonymity. Menah, there is a long history of the Chicago school of Sociology working with people undertaking criminal activity including prostitution and drug use  - it was vitally important work! You will need to do this carefully as Jon says, change names of people and places, use coded field notes with the key somewhere else, burn papers you're done with, stay out of photos, do whatever you have to do, always keeping the stakes in mind. 

Erika Sigvardsdotter at Uppsala University has been doing work with asylum seekers for the past 3 years - she has developed and interesting ways of hiding the identities of her project participants and may be able to help (though I know she is under the pressure of writing up right now). I undertook recreational trespass for my PhD but my project participants were pretty open about the criminal activity they were undertaking so I did not have the same concerns. However, following my ethnography meant breaking the law myself - a good ethnographer doesn't give up when the work becomes uncomfortable. 

In any case, there are a lot of case studies form anthropology and sociology that should be of use like Agar's work with heroin addicts: http://www.amazon.com/Ripping-Running-Ethnography-Addicts-Language/dp/0128021500. I say read what's been done and how they did it, develop a careful methodology, tell ethics what they need to hear and go for it. You may actually have a shot at undertaking a project with some social relevancy and policy implications. We should all strive for as much.

__________________________________
Dr. Bradley L. Garrett
P:  +44 (0)759.054.9322
E: [log in to unmask]
W: http://www.placehacking.co.uk

"The ongoing wow is happening right now." 
          - Speed Levitch

On 12 Mar 2012, at 15:31, Jonathan Cloke wrote:

If you knowingly talk with people who are undocumented you are by definition talking to people who have broken the law. Chapter 2 of the Border Agency’s ‘Immigration Offences and Breaches’ states: “To enter without leave is to enter in breach of section 3(1) (a) and therefore constitutes illegal entry as defined by section 33(1) of the 1971 Act as amended by the 1996 Act.” (http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/enforcement/oemsectiona/). It then goes into the various penalties that can be levied, and believe me these folks don’t mess around.

If you find out (accidentally or on purpose) that someone is sans papieres your ethical application therefore makes it plain that you are expected to report the fact. If you don’t, you are complicit in a breach of a law – it is also possible/probable that if the Border Agency finds out what you’re up to and they even think you’re talking to undocumented immigrants then they may require you to hand over information and take you to court if you refuse – they could also use your information to track down whoever you talk to and then prosecute you anyway.

You need to think really, really carefully about what it is you’re about to do to the women you interview. If they all have legal documentation then that isn’t a problem – which kind of begs the question as to why you need the legal disclaimer in the first place. Are you under the impression that migrants are more likely to commit criminal offences, or is this ethical application a set of weasel words by which you can get the ‘thrill’ of talking to ‘illegals’ but still convince yourself that you’re remaining within the law?

Never mind gaining the trust of an already ‘hard to reach’ group, have you really thought through the damage you can do to what must already be one of the most miserable groups of workers in the UK? Are you prepared to accept the consequences of your involvement in what is a highly-politicized area of government policy, not just for yourself but for the people whose ‘trust’ you might establish and then have to betray anyway?    



Dr Jon Cloke
Lecturer/Research Associate
Geography Department
Loughborough University
Loughborough LE11 3TU

Office: 01509 228193
Mob: 07984 813681
________________________________________
From: A forum for critical and radical geographers [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Menah Raven-Ellison [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 11 March 2012 21:11
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Managing criminal activity disclosures of participants

Dear all,

I’m keen to get some advice on managing the potential disclosure of criminal activity when conducting qualitative research. My sample includes migrant women living in the UK with varying immigration statuses, some of whom may be 'undocumented'. My recent ethics application has been conditionally approved subject to the assertion that I will make it clear to participants that I do “not wish to learn of any criminal activity (on the part of the participant or others) that has not already been dealt with by the Courts… With the participants being aware that anonymity could not be guaranteed in the event of a criminal disclosure”.

This raises a number of concerns not least exacerbating existing challenges of gaining the trust of an already ‘hard to reach group’. Does anyone have any experience of managing anything similar or can offer any advice/references?

Many thanks,
Menah

--
Menah Raven-Ellison
PhD Student
Senior Occupational Therapist
Department of Geography
Queen Mary, University of London
Mile End Road, London E1 4NS
+44 (7824) 902 688