In this post, AHRECS Senior Consultant, Gary Allen, reflects on the fact that some research that does not require research ethics review from a Human Research Ethics Committee or an Animal Ethics Committee involve serious ethical questions that could benefit from guidance and ethical standards.

He uses four topical cases to illustrate why this is an important matter.

(1.) Kennewick Man and the ancient DNA (aDNA) furore – A case where there was an argument about the providence of an ancient body and whether it was subject to First Nation considerations.

(2.) Karl Andersson’s Masturbation Over Child Porn autoethnography project – A case that raised concern and commentary about the ethical oversight of research where there is potential for public harm.

(3.) Myanmar Amber Studies – A question about researchers purchasing amber samples from the country of Myanmar, when there are concerns that the revenue could be used to fund human rights abuses.

(4.) Artifical Intelligence Ethics Review – The use of Artificial Intelligence can have the potential for discrimination of marginalised communities and individuals. Given this potential for harm, it has been asked if there is a need for some form of ethics review of this work.