English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In this article, I discuss methodological and ethical dilemmas when recruiting participants with the help of medical and institutional gatekeepers during my ethnographic fieldwork on commercial surrogacy in St Petersburg, Russia. Based on four case studies, I argue for the use of situational ethics. Solid up-front ethics that are approved by institutional advisory boards are important to ensure that the researcher has done their best to identify potential ethical issues prior to data collection and offer deontological safeguards. However, as empirical researchers, we are familiar with the unanticipated that is bound to happen once we commence data collection. In such cases, when the proposed and approved ethical conduct is no longer suited and researchers must make new ethical choices, situational ethics that take the immediate context into consideration are crucial. I further argue that situational ethics must not only be an extension of procedural ethics when the latter are no longer suited but an alternative to procedural ethics in order to make the research empowering, reciprocal and transformative of existing disadvantaging power relations. With this article, I contribute to the growing literature that argues in favour of situational ethics.

methodological innovations

Situational ethics in a feminist ethnography on commercial surrogacy in Russia: Negotiating access and authority when recruiting participants through institutional gatekeepers