‘MIÚDOS CO(N)VIDA’: DEVELOPING RESEARCH WITH CHILDREN IN TIMES OF PANDEMIC COVID-19

ABSTRACT

The Covid-19 pandemic is a powerful example of how our rights and, in particular, children’s rights are reconfigured. In order to ensure that, in a pandemic context, children’s voices were not kept invisible, we developed some research strategies, which assumed an innovative character, given the contingencies resulting from the lockdown situation. This text aimed to reflect on the ethical and methodological challenges in research with children, taking into account the pandemic and confinement, rethinking strategies and the process of building knowledge with them and about their lives.

Keywords
Childhood; Subjective well-being; Crisis; Rights; Research

RESUMO

A pandemia da Covid-19 é um exemplo poderoso do modo como os nossos direitos são reconfigurados e, em especial, os direitos das crianças. Mobilizadas pela exigência de assegurar que, no contexto de crise pandémica, as vozes das crianças não ficassem invisíveis, foram desenvolvidas algumas estratégias de investigação que assumiram um caráter inovador, dadas as contingências decorrentes da situação de confinamento. Este texto visou à reflexão sobre os desafios éticos e metodológicos na pesquisa com crianças, atendendo ao quadro de pandemia e confinamento, repensando estratégias e o processo de construção de conhecimento com estas e acerca das suas vidas.

Palavras-chave
Infância; Bem-estar subjetivo; Crise; Direitos; Pesquisa

Childhood and the Pandemic Crisis

Childhood has experienced, over the centuries, crises of very varied natures and very differentiated impacts, resulting in a socially (re)constructed concept, depending on time, space, and the child’s status in the context of social interactions.

At many moments in history, and especially at times of crisis, children have seen their basic rights deeply disrespected, being one of the groups most affected by critical times. In fact, it was a context of deep crisis, motivated by the First World War, which led to the emergence of the first declaration of rights for children, the Geneva Declaration of 1924, which argued that in times of crisis, children should be the first to receive support (KING, 1998) and so it is in the pandemic context that we are currently experiencing.

The historical conjuncture motivated by the pandemic situation we are experiencing has forced us to profoundly re-signify our ways of life, and its impact has yet to be determined. In this regard, since March 2020 one can read on the UNICEF webpage:¹

Children are not the face of this pandemic. But they are at risk of being among its greatest victims, as their lives are altering in profound ways. All children, of all ages and in all countries, are being affected, particularly by socioeconomic impacts and, in some cases, by mitigation measures that may inadvertently do more harm than good.

This impact is of significant importance, given how a set of basic survival and protection rights are being conditioned, namely those related to the right to education, play and socialization, or even those related to their political rights, namely the (im)possibilities of participation.

It seems that it can be said that we live in a risk situation, which is global, despite being experienced in profoundly different ways, considering economic, social, cultural or even individual indicators. According to Hespanha (2002), when we talk about risk, we should consider two perspectives: one argues that risk is associated with dynamism and social change, being an indispensable factor for changes to occur; the other argues that risk implies uncertainties that are not always controllable, especially in a context of globalized economy. In the current conjuncture, uncertainties also outweigh the possible advantages, with the pandemic being seen essentially as a serious risk, on a global level, for all individuals and for children in particular. Authors such as Fernandes and Tomás (2016) defend “[...] the idea that the ‘risk society’ will potentially become the ‘catastrophe society,’ insofar as many risks are only debated politically and only gain visibility when the effects of their dissemination have already been consolidated” (BECK, 1992, p. 22). Now, in the case of the pandemic of Covid-19, despite the set of uncertainties that surround it, it seems important to us to build significant knowledge with children about the pandemic period, in order to prevent risks from becoming catastrophes, bringing to the public arena the problem, as well as the participation of children subjects.

The proposal we make in this text is based on a fundamental premise: the construction of knowledge about childhood is a complex process, which will always be incomplete if the contributions of those about whom we speak are not considered—the children. This premise finds support in the scientific area of the sociology of childhood, which argues that:

[...] assumptions such as the child as a social actor, with a socially relevant action, as a subject with rights and a competent being in their worlds of belonging, advocated by foundational authors of the sociology of childhood (Corsaro, 2011; Christensen; James, 2007; Ferreira, 2010, 2002; James; Prout, 1990; James; Jenks; Prout, 1998; Jenks, 1992; Qvortrup, 1991; Sarmento, 2000; Fernandes, 2009; Tomás, 2011), will allow developing new methodological perspectives in order to overcome “narrow versions” about the child (Woodhead, 2004), which until then had been reiterated by dominant academic discourses and research methodologies.

(FERNANDES; SOUZA, 2020, p. 600, our translation)

Thus, we consider that the pandemic context that we live in should mobilize the participation of all, and children in particular, so that, from the contributions arising from the processes of knowledge construction, we can prevent greater impacts on child welfare. Almeida and Ramos do Ó referem, in this regard, that we should see the pandemic context as an opportunity to build new possibilities:

[...] in the way adults and children can build another relational agency in the encounter with the unknown [...]. The adult discourse, wherever it comes from, is not convincing; the mantle of truth has lost thickness, has become diaphanous, and lets itself be crossed by other rationalities, by other questions. We feel the possibility of exchanging fear and its thousand arms for astonishment.

(2020, p. 287, our translation).

Based on this opportunity to build new possibilities, we defend the importance of ensuring new ways to access knowledge, considering children as valid units of analysis in themselves and authorial subjects in the process of building knowledge, knowledge that is fundamental to the definition of public policies and the consequent implementation of social practices that respect the rights of children.

Ethical and Methodological Challenges in Research with Children

Research with children is, in itself, a field of action as important as it is sensitive (MARTINS; OLIVEIRA; TENDAIS, 2018). The participation of children in studies on issues that concern them evokes the dimension, already argued before, of rights and the imperative that we contribute to their promotion and safeguard (FERNANDES, 2016; SANI, 2013). In addition, such participation requires unavoidable ethical considerations, such as the obligation to mitigate damages and ensure that the research activity is necessary and justified (FRAGA, 2016). These principles are particularly salient when the studies to be conducted with children take place in circumstances, contexts and/or moments of particular adversity, such as those of poverty, violence or pandemic (BERMAN, 2020; FERREIRA; BUTTELL; FERREIRA, 2015; MARTINS; SANI, 2020). Thus, the challenges of research with children relate not only to the debate on the legitimacy of effective involvement, often shielded by the argument of protection and parental authority (GONÇALVES; SANI, 2013), but also extends to the discussion on how this participation can occur without causing harm.

The question about the purpose of research with children finds manifest explanation in the interest of the studies for the participant and/or society at large, for example, to obtain new generalizable knowledge (NUFFIELD COUNCIL ON BIOETHICS, 2015) about how a given phenomenon affects a given population. This reveals at the outset that responsible researchers must be fully aware of ethical principles, adhering to them, respecting them, and explaining to participants the benefits that may accrue from their participation (DIEKEMA, 2009). This information should be given in an understandable way to legal guardians and the children themselves, who can at any time withdraw from participation in a study, without any harm resulting to them or others (MARSH et al., 2019). In addition, it is incumbent on researchers to provide information about available help mechanisms during the process, after the end of the research, and even within the scope of the dissemination of the results (FRAGA, 2016), and each of these phases may presuppose consents adjusted to the concrete moment or situation.

The pandemic context caused by Covid-19 brought about a series of fears and uncertainties, generating anxieties and concerns in the children, motivated by the restrictions imposed by the confinement and consequent limitations in interpersonal interactions. Digital contacts, to continue schooling, but also to allow some socialization, became unavoidable realities, not always generating positive impacts on children. Understanding how the pandemic affected the subjective well-being of children and being able to hear them in the first person were central aspects in our research, which allowed us to give voice to a population that was little listened to and to contribute so that practices based on their experiences could help them face the new reality. It was imperative to the researchers that the purposes of child participation did not generate new anxieties, but, on the contrary, translated into a benefit for them in terms of the expression of their concerns and needs. In addition, it was important to generate evidence without promoting any risks, namely contagion (LOBE; MORGAN; HOFFMAN, 2020), as well as to guarantee the privacy and confidentiality of their answers, under the informed consent of the legal guardians and the consent of the children themselves, as advocated by some authors (MARSH et al., 2019; POWELL; SMITH, 2006).

The challenge of conducting research with children in a pandemic context also imposes a reflection on how to generate scientific evidence in a reliable and accurate way (BERMAN, 2020), facing a variability of experiences and access to possible mechanisms for collecting information. Conducting studies during a pandemic situation like the one we face at present forces researchers to rethink the methods and techniques (LOBE; MORGAN; HOFFMAN, 2020) that best fit and help answer the research questions. Physical proximity, greatly enhanced by the use of qualitative techniques such as interviews or observation, now cause a series of recommendations, which integrate the opinions of ethics committees, which have established new guidelines and procedures in scientific research with human subjects (VASCONCELOS et al., 2021), including clinical trials (JAMROZIK et al., 2021).

In the social sciences, the mobilization of digital tools has responded to the needs felt in qualitative research (ARCHIBALD et al., 2019), or that privilege face-to-face interaction (LOBE; MORGAN; HOFFMAN, 2020). Important ethical questions also arise at this level (HORRELL; STEPHENS; BREHENY, 2015; LOBE; MORGAN; HOFFMAN, 2020), in much related to the methodological choices put forward (e.g., “How secure are the communication platforms?”; “How can data confidentiality be ensured?”; “How can participants’ anonymity be safeguarded?”). Studies that make use of digital technologies, whose direct participants are children, must safeguard the privacy, anonymity, and confidentiality of the data (BERMAN, 2020). Since participation in such studies requires some digital literacy, it is important to be aware of the limitations that accompany them, namely the difficulties of access to digital media for the entire child and youth population. On the other hand, there may be situations of authorized participation that may not necessarily emanate from an informed consent of legal guardians, not excluding, then, the consideration of the legal implications that this may raise (BERMAN, 2020).

Finally, in addition to all the aspects listed above, which occupied our minds during the course of the study in the pandemic period, another point has been keenly reflected upon: that of returning the results to the participants and to society. Aware of the importance of this moment, we suggest that, faithful to the principles that guided the entire research, both in ethical and methodological terms, the return of the results could be done using the same digital media, giving notice of this decision, through the same means of dissemination that was used to appeal for participation in the study. The disclosure must be broad, appropriate and accessible, so as to reach the maximum number of potential participants, and the results must be discussed in aggregate form, seeking the main conclusions, without including identification citations, under penalty of generating some kind of discrimination (BERMAN, 2020). The triangulation that can be made of the findings, the feedback from academic and nonacademic audiences, and the opportunity for suggestions that effect real changes, even when aware of the limitations presented, are central aspects of any process of scientific devolution.

Thus, if the goal is of interest to the participants and/or society in general, it is important to ensure that the visibility is good enough, so that it reaches the strategic audiences that can mobilize support, promote rights, and ensure the well-being of children. It is from this and other challenges that we intend to account for in a concrete way, based on the study carried out.

Challenges of Research with Portuguese Children in a Pandemic Context

The idea for this study arose within reflections that were made by the authors, from a preliminary stage of the enactment of the first population confinement due to Covid-19 in Portugal, in the first days of March 2020.

The confinement and health surveillance measures amplified the challenges of conducting the research, both in the domain of protection strategies and parental authority (GONÇALVES; SANI, 2013) and about the ways in which the possible participation of children could occur without causing harm. We present, in some detail, the outlines of the three identified challenges.

The Ontological Challenge

The pandemic brought with it widespread disruption to the daily lives of families, as schools, businesses and services shut down, requiring instant adaptation to the virtual world in order to allow effective communication, work at a distance, and enjoyment and online services. Without regard to generational differences, digital connectivity was suddenly imposed: for elders to maintain communication, for workers to keep their jobs, for families to preserve basic routines, for children and young people to maintain their school activities, among others. In this process, the voice of the children seemed not to be heard, as few health measures were taken with the condition of the youngest citizens in mind, much less based on their ideas or opinions. For example, during the state of emergency it was planned that families would be allowed to take a hygienic walk with their pets, but nothing was heard about allowing children to play outdoors or advocating for children’s access to public playground structures. In another text, the authors note that online memes began to multiply in which children appeared caged, chained to their parents’ chairs while they worked, in short, presented as someone who has to be contained and regulated, not as someone who has an active part in the moment; that is, as citizens who had also seen their rights suspended (FERNANDES; BARRA, 2020).

Simultaneously, as time passed and the confinement situation was prolonged, the difficulties in mobilizing children using the tools of the online format increased. That is, according to the experiences that were close to us, the Internet and screens in general seemed to have ceased to be so attractive when they became the only form of social interaction for children and young people: to attending classes, studying, doing group work with peers, doing homework, talking to friends, contacting family members, accessing news, etc. Thus, also consistent with other investigations (DOVE et al., 2020), the attempts to provide online communication mechanisms, new possibilities for interaction started to be unattractive to children, something that may explain, for example, the low adherence of children and young people to fill out the questionnaire placed online, as explained below.

In this context, giving attention on children and young people, noticing the ways in which they were being seen (or not) and promoting the listening of their experiences and the evaluation of their wellbeing in the context of the pandemic presented themselves as imperatives for those who, like the authors of this study, defend the rights of children and young people that the child is an active subject of rights.

The Methodological Challenge

The second challenge was launched: the exercise of researching about and with children about their well-being, which, although necessary and justified (FRAGA, 2016), ran into unfriendly contexts in terms of research, considering the way research with children had been conceived until then.

How to overcome the barriers of confinement and screens?

The impossibility of using some of the tools that in the field of child studies have allowed us to build friendly and meaningful research relationships (such as participant observation or interviews, either individual or group) required us to mobilize our methodological imagination, to reinvent ourselves as researchers, to ensure that the voices of children could be heard and give their contribution to understanding the pandemic situation.

Several proposals emerged from that demand, among which was the development of a “Questionnaire on Child Well-Being in Time of Pandemic” to be answered online by children (through the Google Docs application), aiming to access their perceptions regarding several dimensions of well-being: Health, Education, Relationships with family and peers, and Satisfaction with Life. This questionnaire survey was answered by 56 children, mostly boys (55, 4%) aged 11, 12 and 15. In the questionnaire, the children had the opportunity to characterize their well-being during the period of confinement considering several dimensions: “Your Health in Times of Pandemic”; “Your School in Times of Pandemic”; “Your Family in Times of Pandemic”; “Your Friends in Times of Pandemic”; and “Your Life Satisfaction in Times of Pandemic”.

Besides of operationalization of this data collection tool, in an unprecedented methodological initiative in partnership with Miúdos Radio,² three “Thematic Debates” were held live and recorded (by the Zoom platform) in the form of focus group, with virtual presence of several children as speakers of the radio, possibility of intervention of children listeners and moderation of now researchers-speakers-adults. The discussions were then conducted in such a way that the children addressed the dimensions of Education, Health and Relationships, and more specifically the questions: “What if the school was always like this?”; and “Did you worry about your health and the health of others?”. Changes in relationships were also addressed, “With family and friends?”

Also, respecting the right of children and young people to express themselves with maximum freedom, and being facilitated the access to a space that is known and safe for children to exercise their right to speak and think together about ideas and share them, the researchers did not want to miss this opportunity to listen intensely to what children had to say (FERNANDES, 2016; SANI, 2013). That is, with due clarification and consent, the recordings of twelve “Live Broadcasts” of Miúdos Radio, for a total of 30 hours of broadcasting, were also thoroughly analyzed in order to collect their spontaneous expressions under the theme of the pandemic: state of emergency, confinement, coronavirus, Covid-19, etc. In the context of “Live Broadcasts,” several narratives were collected from 21 girls and 9 boys, aged between 8 and 15.

In total, considering the different methodological strategies used, 86 Portuguese children (46 girls and 40 boys) between 6 and 16 years old participated in this study, which showed an active, reflective and assertive participation that exponentially enriched the analysis of the data collected during the period of the Covid-19 pandemic, regarding the way they perceive their well-being (FERNANDES; BARRA, 2022).³

Ethical Challenges

The ethical issues involved in research with children and young people have taken on more complex dimensions in the pandemic context.

Aware of the responsibility of developing ethically informed research with children, the challenge was how to properly implement the various stages of the research. The initial one, which has to do with the necessary consent of the child’s legal guardians, becomes more complex when framed in a context in which, prior to the pandemic context, Portugal was already going through a complicated moment, resulting from the obligations/readings made to the General Data Protection Regulation,⁴ which led to the raising of significant barriers, both in the access to children and in the use of their images. Fernandes and Caputo identify, regarding these limitations, a ghost image of the child that, in the opinion of the authors, reveals “[...] processes that disrespect basic ethical care, disrespecting their ontological condition as subjects, appearing subsumed to an adult order that decides for them, sometimes shamelessly using their image, sometimes making it invisible” (2021, p. 17, our translation). Now, in the context of confinement we live in, the only possibility of being able to mobilize the participation of children was through online devices, with all the precautions that are linked to it and that, ultimately, under the aegis of child protection, leave them in a register of invisibility, as the authors argue.

In cases where it was possible to overcome this obstacle, the researchers were careful to inform the children about the study and how it would be conducted, about whether or not they could participate in it, and that they could withdraw at any time if they wished.

The ethical care of informing the researchers about the results of the study was also safeguarded by holding a meeting/debate with some of the children participating in the study (with an online broadcast on Miúdos Radio).

As stated in the opening of this text, moments of crisis also seem to be fruitful in innovations in the area of childhood and new impulses for the well-being of children. Here it is suggested that this study, carried out in a moment of pandemic crisis (and motivated by this period), in difficult circumstances for both children and researchers, also made it possible to go a little further in the methodological experience of promoting an effective participation of children in the research. That is, and as Laura Lundy (2007) suggests in her model of conceptualization of the child’s right to participation (article 12 of the UNCRC, 1989), we understood that pretending to listen to the children’s “voice” was not enough. It was necessary, as experienced in this study, for children to do so in a safe ‘space’ for them, for their ideas to have an effective ‘hearing,’ and for the expression of their ideas and opinions to actually have some ‘influence’ on the actions that were (and are) being taken regarding their lives and well-being (LUNDY, 2007) in the context of the pandemic of Covid-19.

Concluding Remarks

In this work, as in others we have conducted, the child is assumed, without equivocation and minority, as a subject of rights, who actively participates in the research, reflects and helps the researcher to reconstruct the framework of understanding of the phenomena that affect him/her. In the context of the pandemic of Covid-19, several risks emerged, raising questions about the possibility of children’s participation in the numerous research studies that emerged, which largely observed the health problem from an adult-centered perspective. However, it was important to know how children were experiencing this problem, what interference it was having in their lives and how they themselves defined subjective well-being.

The imposed confinement, the limitations in interpersonal contacts and the use of digital media were unavoidable measures for everyone and that led some researchers, who developed studies with children, to reflect how to operationalize the research that would allow understanding the child’s perspective about a new phenomenon that affected humanity. It was around the challenges experienced and faced throughout the process of conducting research with children in Portugal that we discussed the possibilities and pertinence of considering and guaranteeing certain basic principles, focusing on: the nature and role of its participants (children); the most appropriate methodologies for research in the context of social confinement; and the fundamental ethical principles in any research.

We concluded that it was possible to generate concrete alternatives, capable of responding to the multiple challenges that we discussed and to develop research with Portuguese children in the context of a pandemic, which responded to the need to obtain a grounded knowledge on their subjective well-being, whose evidence emerged from a prudent definition of research practices, with respect for the most basic ethical principles. This work and the ongoing devolution of this research, to which once again the strategic academic and nonacademic audiences were called, both through institutional dissemination media (universities) and digital media used in the study (Miúdios Radio, Zoom platform), also demonstrate how this is a long, sensitive and rewarding process in conducting child studies.

Notes

• 1
  See https://data.unicef.org/covid-19-and-children/
• 2
  To learn more, see https://www.radiomiudos.pt/
• 3
  A detailed description of this study can be found in another text by the researchers (BARRA; FERNANDES; SANI, 2022).
• 4
  Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament.

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

• Thematic issue organized by: Levindo Diniz Carvalho, Maria Cristina Soares de Gouvêa e Natália Fernandes

• Availability of Research Data

  Data will be provided upon request.

• Funding

  This work was funded by National Funds through the Foundation for Science and Technology(FCT) under the projects of the Research Center for Child Studies (CIEC) at the University of Minho, with the references UIDB/00317/2020 and UIDP/00317/2020.

REFERÊNCIAS

• ALMEIDA, T.; RAMOS DO Ó, J. La vida como evento y el poder de lo indeterminado en tiempos de pandemia. Sociedad e Infancias, v. 4, p. 285-288, 30 jun. 2020 https://doi.org/10.5209/soci.69737.
  » https://doi.org/10.5209/soci.69737
• ARCHIBALD, M. M. et al. Using Zoom videoconferencing for qualitative data collection: perceptions and experiences of researchers and participants. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, v. 18, p. 1-8, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1609406919874596
  » https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1609406919874596
• BARRA, M.; FERNANDES, N. .; SANI, A. I. O bem-estar subjetivo das crianças em tempos de confinamento. Revista Portuguesa de Educação, v. 35, n. 1, p. 380–404, 2022. https://doi.org/10.21814/rpe.23741.
  » https://doi.org/10.21814/rpe.23741
• BECK, U. Risk society Towards a new modernity. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1992.
• BERMAN, G. Ethical considerations for evidence generation involving children on the Covid-19 Pandemic Florence: UNICEF Office of Research – Innocenti, 2020. Disponível em: https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/1086-ethical-considerations-for-evidence-generation-involving-children-on-the-covid-19.html Acesso em: 25 maio 2021.
  » https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/1086-ethical-considerations-for-evidence-generation-involving-children-on-the-covid-19.html
• DIEKEMA, D. S. Ethical issues in research involving infants. Seminars in Perinatology, v. 33, n. 6, p. 364-371, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semperi.2009.07.003
  » https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semperi.2009.07.003
• DOVE, N. et al. Impact of school closures on learning, and child and family well-being. British Columbia Medical Journal, v. 62, n. 9, p. 338, 2020. Disponível em: https://bcmj.org/bccdc-covid-19/impact-school-closures-learning-and-child-and-family-well-being Acesso em: 04 maio 2022.
  » https://bcmj.org/bccdc-covid-19/impact-school-closures-learning-and-child-and-family-well-being
• FERNANDES, N. Investigação participativa com crianças. In: MAIA, R. L. et al. (orgs.). Dicionário Crime, Justiça e Sociedade Lisboa: Edições Sílabo, 2016. p. 280-281.
• FERNANDES, N.; BARRA, M. Trancadas em casa! As crianças fintam a Covid-19. Sociedad e Infancias, v. 4, p. 251-254, 30 jun. 2020. https://doi.org/10.5209/soci.69719
  » https://doi.org/10.5209/soci.69719
• FERNANDES, N.; CAPUTO, S. Quem tem medo das imagens das crianças na pesquisa? – Contributos para a utilização de imagens na pesquisa com crianças. Revista Sociedad e Infancias, v. 5, p. 5-19. 2021. Disponível em: https://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/SOCI/article/view/71598/4564456555724 Acesso em: 25 maio 2021. https://doi.org/10.5209/soci.71598
  » https://doi.org/10.5209/soci.71598» https://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/SOCI/article/view/71598/4564456555724
• FERNANDES, N.; SOUZA, L. F. Da afonia à voz das crianças nas pesquisas: uma compreensão crítica do conceito de voz. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa (Auto)Biográfica, v. 5, n. 15, p. 597-613, 2020. https://doi.org/10.31892/rbpab2525-426X.2020.v5.n15.p970-986
  » https://doi.org/10.31892/rbpab2525-426X.2020.v5.n15.p970-986
• FERNANDES, N.; TOMÁS, C. Infância, direitos e risco(s): velhos e novos desafios identificados a partir da análise dos Relatórios da CNPCJR (2000 e 2010). Fórum Sociológico, v. 29, p. 21-29. 2016. Disponível em: http://www.latindex.org/latindex/inicio Acesso em: 25 maio 2021. https://doi.org/10.4000/sociologico.1470
  » https://doi.org/10.4000/sociologico.1470» http://www.latindex.org/latindex/inicio
• FERREIRA, R. J.; BUTTELL, F.; FERREIRA, S. Ethical considerations for conducting disaster research with vulnerable populations. Journal of Social Work Values and Ethics, v. 12, n. 1, p. 29-40. 2015. Disponível em: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5801/6d85325ca2d38803d31411673a2500bc3f57.pdf Acesso em: 25 maio 2021.
  » https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5801/6d85325ca2d38803d31411673a2500bc3f57.pdf
• FRAGA, S. Methodological and ethical challenges in violence research. Porto Biomedical Journal, v.1, n. 2, p. 77-80, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbj.2016.04.005
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbj.2016.04.005
• GONÇALVES, M.; SANI, A. Instrumentos jurídicos de proteção às crianças: do passado ao presente. E-Cadernos CES, v. 20, p. 186-200, 2013. https://doi.org/10.4000/eces.1728
  » https://doi.org/10.4000/eces.1728
• HESPANHA, P. Individualização, fragmentação e risco social nas sociedades globalizadas. Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais, v. 63, p. 21-31, 2002. https://doi.org/10.4000/rccs.1253
  » https://doi.org/10.4000/rccs.1253
• HORRELL, B.; STEPHENS, C.; BREHENY, M. Online research with informal caregivers: opportunities and challenges. Qualitative Research in Psychology, v. 12, n. 3, p. 258-271, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2015.1040318
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2015.1040318
• JAMROZIK, E. et al. Key criteria for the ethical acceptability of Covid-19 human challenge studies: report of a WHO Working Group. Vaccine, v. 39, n. 4, p. 633-640, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.10.075
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.10.075
• KING, M. You have to start somewhere. In: DOUGLAS, G.; SEBBA, L. (orgs.). Children’s rights and traditional values Ashgate: Routledge, 1998. p. 1-14.
• LOBE, B.; MORGAN, D.; HOFFMAN, K. A. Qualitative data collection in an era of social distancing. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, v. 19, p. 1–8, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920937875
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920937875
• LUNDY, L. The voice is not enough: conceptualising Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. British Educational Research Journal, v. 33, n. 6, p. 927-942, Dec. 2007. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920701657033
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920701657033
• MARSH, V. et al. Who should decide about children’s and adolescents’ participation in health research? The views of children and adults in rural Kenya. BMC Medical Ethics 2019, v. 20, n.1, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-019-0375-9
  » https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-019-0375-9
• MARTINS, P. C.; OLIVEIRA, V. H.; TENDAIS, I. Research with children and young people on sensitive topics: The case of poverty and delinquency. Childhood, v. 25, n. 4, p. 458-472, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568218793931
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568218793931
• MARTINS, P. C.; SANI, A. Consent for research on violence against children: Dilemmas and contradictions. Societies, v. 10, n. 1, p. 15, 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc10010015
  » https://doi.org/10.3390/soc10010015
• NUFFIELD COUNCIL ON BIOETHICS. Children and clinical research: ethical issues. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 2015. Disponível em: https://nuffieldbioethics.org/wp-content/uploads/Children-and-clinical-research-full-report.pdf Acesso em: 25 maio 2021.
  » https://nuffieldbioethics.org/wp-content/uploads/Children-and-clinical-research-full-report.pdf
• ONU [ORGANIZAÇÃO DAS NAÇÕES UNIDAS]. Convenção sobre os Direitos da Criança Lisboa: Comitê Português para a UNICEF, 1989. Disponível em: https://www.unicef.pt/media/2766/unicef_convenc-a-o_dos_direitos_da_crianca.pdf Acesso em: 25 maio 2021.
  » https://www.unicef.pt/media/2766/unicef_convenc-a-o_dos_direitos_da_crianca.pdf
• POWELL, M. A.; SMITH, A. B. Ethical guidelines for research with children: a review of current research ethics documentation in New Zealand. Kōtuitui: New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences Online, v. 1, n. 2, p. 125-138, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1080/1177083X.2006.9522415
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/1177083X.2006.9522415
• UNIÃO EUROPEIA. Regulamento (UE) 2016/679 do parlamento europeu e do Conselho, de 27 de abril de 2016 – relativo à proteção das pessoas singulares no que diz respeito ao tratamento de dados pessoais e à livre circulação desses dados e que revoga a Diretiva 95/46/CE (Regulamento Geral sobre a Proteção de Dados). Jornal Oficial da União Europeia, 04 maio 2016.
• SANI, A. Reflexões sobre infância e os direitos de participação da criança no contexto da justiça. E-Cadernos CES, v. 20, p. 75-89, 2013. https://doi.org/10.4000/eces.1668
  » https://doi.org/10.4000/eces.1668
• VASCONCELOS, S. M. R. et al. Uma perspectiva sobre aspectos éticos e regulatórios sobre a pesquisa em seres humanos na pandemia de Covid-19. SciELO em Perspectiva, 29 abr. 2021. Disponível em https://blog.scielo.org/blog/2021/04/29/uma-perspectiva-sobre-aspectos-eticos-e-regulatorios-sobre-a-pesquisa-em-seres-humanos-na-pandemia-de-covid-19/ Acesso em: 25 maio 2021.
  » https://blog.scielo.org/blog/2021/04/29/uma-perspectiva-sobre-aspectos-eticos-e-regulatorios-sobre-a-pesquisa-em-seres-humanos-na-pandemia-de-covid-19/

Edited by

Associate Editors:

Maria Rosa Rodrigues M. Camargo e Rita de Cassia Gallego

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  29 Aug 2022
• Date of issue
  Sep-Dec 2022

History

• Received
  01 Feb 2022
• Accepted
  23 May 2022