Which Is An Example of a Situation Where Deferential Vulnerability Might Be ?
In many situations, people use the phrases “I’m sorry” and “I apologize” to show respect when another person wrongs them. But more is needed for some people who want a more forgiving apology. The deferential vulnerability may change how some people think about apologies so that they can be received with less anger or negativity.
Deferential vulnerability involves admitting you were wrong without narrowing or blaming the other person for what happened and then asking for forgiveness respectfully.
The deferential vulnerability occurs when an individual perceives themselves as lower than another person. This might be based on various social, racial, or educational factors. A physician, for example, may be more knowledgeable than the students they supervise, or the physician may be of higher social status. While deference may be intended with good intentions, it can lead to abuse and exploitation.
In presenting the concept of vulnerability in research guidelines, researchers often overlook other vulnerability types, including increased risk of exploitation, lack of fundamental rights, or incapacity to consent freely. While it is essential to acknowledge the different types of vulnerability, few guidelines define them. Instead, most convey that the concept is based on the inability to provide free and informed consent without addressing the ethical issues surrounding these groups. In many cases, the implications of vulnerability extend beyond the issue of free and informed consent, addressing issues of fair subject selection, favorable risk-benefit assessment, and justice.
The CIOMS guidelines and the TCPS2 guidelines use broader language, defining vulnerability as a lack of capacity to protect one’s interests. These guidelines also identify the sources of vulnerability, including within a subject and in the environment. In addition, both guidelines mention autonomy and implicitly relate autonomy to vulnerability.
Although TCPS2 is a useful framework for defining and managing vulnerabilities, it may only be suitable for some situations. This is because the vulnerability spectrum varies widely between circumstances, and there is no universal vulnerability model. However, the guidelines provide general guidelines addressing the most commonly occurring sources of vulnerability.
In addition to these guidelines, the study also identified 51 different groups of people who may be vulnerable. The most common categories include:
- Persons with mental health issues.
- Patients in emergency settings.
- Certain ethnocultural and racial groups.
Further, a vulnerable group may be identified based on other factors, such as the participant’s social status.
There may be unique vulnerabilities within each of these groups, which can be addressed through interdisciplinary approaches. However, this approach requires that you take into account the cultural and historical contexts that affect vulnerability.
There is a growing body of literature discussing vulnerability in research ethics. This literature seeks to advance the concept of vulnerability by exploring the range of possible policy responses to vulnerable participants. It does not identify a standard definition of vulnerability but highlights several instances where it might be relevant.
Despite this, vulnerability is rarely discussed explicitly in ethical principles and guidelines. However, these principles serve as considerations when assessing research and ethics. Moreover, there are few explanations of what constitutes vulnerability in terms of prisoners, emergency care patients, and other vulnerable populations.
Vulnerability is a crucial principle in the Declaration of Helsinki, which has principles for human rights. The Declaration of Helsinki states that certain groups and individuals are particularly vulnerable. The UNESCO Declaration also promotes respect for human vulnerability and personal integrity.
While vulnerability is often defined in terms of individual characteristics, Hurst and Luna identify multiple layers resulting from interactions between individuals and their environment. These layers interact with one another to create a “context-dependent” form of vulnerability.
The study also identifies various geographical and temporal trends of social vulnerability. In particular, counties that have experienced significant depopulation are now experiencing increasing social vulnerability. This is mainly due to the depopulation of the Great Plains. Between 1960 and 2000, the population of these counties declined by 49-59 percent. Consequently, the remaining population depends on government and social services to survive.
The concept of vulnerability is driven by exposure, sensitivity, and response characteristics. The concept of vulnerability is complex and has many contested meanings, making it challenging to develop a reliable metric. Despite this, identifying social vulnerability is essential in disaster risk management.
The guidelines also address the notion of vulnerability and offer a conceptual framework to help guide research with vulnerable subjects. The guidelines describe vulnerable subjects as individuals whose capacity to provide informed consent is compromised by social pressures. In addition, they discuss the need for special justifications when utilizing vulnerable populations for research. Furthermore, they stress the importance of protecting vulnerable subjects from over-recruitment.
Group-specific vulnerability is a type of vulnerability in which an individual experiences a sense of subordination because of their social status. This is especially true in western societies. A physician, for example, is often seen as superior to other doctors because of their perceived level of knowledge and expertise.
Deferential vulnerability can be created in many contexts. For example, a physician recruiting patients for medical research may create a situation where the physician is perceived as superior by the patients, which may lead to less informed consent. Such a power dynamic can also affect the patient’s ability to weigh the risks of medical treatment, which may be outside the patient’s best interest.
Group-specific vulnerability can also occur when the researcher has special knowledge about the specific characteristics of an individual. For example, a group-specific study involving a large cash payment may expose an impoverished mother to the risk of exploitation. In contrast, a short survey without compensation would not put an impoverished mother at risk of exploitation. Similarly, a wealthy, middle-aged CEO who is not considered vulnerable may be considered vulnerable if he is undergoing a medical examination and experiencing chest pain.
Another situation where the deferential vulnerability may be appropriate is when a person’s vulnerability is related to their values. For example, a vulnerable young child or neonate in intensive care may have more psychological or physical vulnerability than another individual. Similarly, a vulnerable person in a pre-existing relationship may be more likely to be deemed vulnerable.
The group-specific vulnerability may be a result of a social class or race. Women, in particular, may only be able to attend income-generating activities with their husbands’ permission. Similarly, women often cannot evacuate themselves from rising flood waters without a male chaperone. Using an intersectional approach to vulnerability can provide insights into ways to mitigate this type of vulnerability and prevent it from occurring.
The Australian National Statement proposes a more holistic conceptualization of vulnerability. It discusses the vulnerability of specific groups and identifies guiding ethical principles for research involving vulnerable subjects.
Deferential vulnerability is a social norm that may occur in individuals for several reasons. First, it is more common in western societies than in non-western cultures. For example, physicians may be more likely to recruit patients in the United States due to their social standing and perceived higher knowledge. This can make physicians seem submissive to patients, increasing their vulnerability.
Deferential vulnerability is a social construct that occurs when an individual is viewed as below another individual due to their social status or knowledge of the subject. This can occur in various contexts, including when a college professor is regarded as a superior individual to a student. This can occur even if both people share the same field of study.
In addition to deferential vulnerability, a research participant may also be considered vulnerable. This may indicate that a participant cannot give informed consent to certain research practices. Kipnis argues that these situations signal ethical concerns in research. Kipnis describes six vulnerability types: cognitive, deferential, medical, juridic, allocational, and infrastructural.
A growing body of literature criticizes and advances the concept of vulnerability in research ethics. Many of these publications are focused on how vulnerable research participants are treated. However, they also provide essential guidelines for how research involves vulnerable groups. There are several significant debates over the concept of vulnerability.