Observing ethical principles is a mandate for every research. All participants were of legal adult status, thus the study did not knowingly involve participants who had intellectual or mental impairments, had experienced traumatic or stressful life circumstances, had HI Virus, were highly dependent on medical care, were in dependent or unequal relationships, were in captivity or living in particularly vulnerable life circumstances. Thus, participants’ rights to informed consent and confidentiality were fully observed to ensure that the respondents’
rights were protected.
Although the study was ethically cleared by the university as involving minimal risk and not regarded to be of a sensitive nature (see Appendix a), all procedures were followed to also seek approval from the Lesotho National Health Research and Ethics Committee under the Ministry of Health. Thus with the clearance from my respective university this Committee was approached to seek permission to undertake the research using tertiary institutions students. All people in Lesotho researching on health care issues, where their studies involve human subjects, are obliged to obtain permission from this Committee. The permission was awarded without objections (see Appendix b). Permission was also sought from the tertiary institutions (see Appendices c, d and e) and from the participants themselves permission was sought verbally. One consent form was prepared per school, with all participants, including the assigned teacher, endorsing their signature to show that they participated of their own free will (see Appendices f, g and h).
109 Orientation meetings with participants were planned to be held a day before the actual focus group meetings in order to fully inform the respondents about the study, using an information sheet (and invitation to participate in the study - see Appendix i). These meetings were held a day before the actual interviews to give participants time to discuss the issue with their teachers and peers afterwards, so that they could decide whether to participate in the research or not without fear of compulsion. Hence, their written consent was sought before the focus group discussion could commence.
In view of the possibility that the materials or the questions could generate distress for some participants, since some might relate them to their own health status or bitter experiences (of illness or even death of loved ones), a qualified HIV and AIDS18 counselor was available in the event that any participant(s) showed a need for such support. The length of the interview was also considered as one of the factors that may induce stress for participants and make them shy away from taking part in the second discussions. So it was explained from the beginning that the second discussion would take a short time. However, the interviews suffered no causalities.
At the end of the orientation meeting participants were allowed to keep a copy of the information sheet. During these meetings the concept of volunteerism was emphasized, to ensure that the learners understood that their participation in the study was not compulsory, that they participated at their own free will and were not supposed to be asked by their institutions to give reasons why they wanted to participate, nor would their withdrawal from the study have any negative consequences. This was emphasized because institutions have an authoritarian culture where learners are used to receiving instructions. Although the learners’
anonymity was observed in the findings, participants were, however, asked to write down their names and give the list to the assigned assisting teachers to make sure that the same students were used for the second meetings.
18 Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
110 Although participants were granted no material or financial incentives for participating in the study, it was hoped that learners would gain new knowledge and thus be educated on HIV- related matters. In this way it was hoped that the study would be profitable for them in that it would help to minimize their chances of being harmed by HIV. This was deemed possible, especially because the study employed an interpretivist paradigm, which according to Chilisa and Preece (2005: 28), “allows for human thinking, perceiving and other mental and
physiological acts”. For instance, it was hoped that issues such as masturbation would have a news value, be informative, interesting and contain an element of surprise for them, as masturbation is still a taboo in Lesotho.
Respondent institutions were not by any means deceived by attempts to access any
information from the learners without their institution’s prior consent, or by asking learners to commit any act which might diminish their self-respect or cause them to experience shame, embarrassment, or regret. Throughout all stages of the research, learners were never exposed to stressful or upsetting questions or procedures which may have had unpleasant or harmful side effects, as the research did not involve the use of stimuli, tasks or procedures which may have been experienced as stressful, harmful or unpleasant.
To ensure that both males and females were equally represented in the study, discussion groups were formed with five males and five females. In the pursuit of fairness, institutions were also asked to ensure that learners with a disability (especially those with sight and hearing impairments) were included in the study. For those with hearing impairment, a sign language interpreter would have been made available, had they been present. I had hoped to share the study’s draft report with the respondents, in order to ensure that justice was
maintained and to solicit their comments, but this was not possible with the Lesotho College of Education, since participants were in their last year of the study. However, the final copy of the report will be shared with all three institutions, in the hope that recommendations that emanated from the study will be of benefit to the learners as individuals and to the institutions as well.
111