Ethical Obligation Paper

Anthropological studies are mostly done through ethnography, which requires complete immersion within the culture or community to be studied (Eller 2007). However, such immersion can lead the anthropologist to situations that would challenge her o his values and morals when making a decision. Hence, an ethical statement was created, which helps to guide and influence anthropologists and other scientific researchers’ behavior in certain moral-compromising situations. This ethical statement is composed of seven clauses – do no harm, be open and honest about the purpose of the work, obtain participant’s signed informed consent and other necessary authorizations (Laporte 2012). In addition, anthropologists must weigh competing ethical obligations

Gaps about the past events that led the government to implement a new program to cease the blood feuds or future events, after the murder that would require Thompson to speak up (Romero Ramirez 2018). Romero provided an extra hypothetical situation – “Suppose the following week [Thompson] witnesses [four] more deaths… [same killer]. Is Thompson supposed to remain silent?” In support of his hypothetical situation, Romero cited the fourth clause of the ethical statement – “Weight Competing Ethical Obligations Due Collaborators and Affected Parties.” However, I mentioned that even before Romero’s hypothetical situation, the fourth clause applies to this case. This clause recognizes that anthropologists’ work has multiple obligations to different parties, such as research participants or colleagues, employers or funders among others (Laporte 2012). Thus, during conflicting situations between ethical standards and social expectations, anthropologists must weigh their ethical obligations trying to avoid affecting primarily their collaborations with research participants, but also colleagues, sponsors, and employers (Laporte 2012). Thus, I consider that Thompson weighed her ethical obligations to the community members and social expectations to talk to the policemen. She prioritized her obligations towards the community, perhaps because some of the men involved in the gathering or the people who pleaded

She protected her research participants and her records. Also, as Dora Born stated – “[Thompson] was abiding the rules of the community.” The community provided a solution to the issue – the killer made a monetary compensation to the family of the deceased and was allowed to attend the funeral. After the funeral, when the policemen started to ask around to the possible witnesses (including Thompson), other members of the community pleaded ignorance about the incident (Born 2018). Therefore, Thompson, as a guest in the community, was not in the position to act contrarily to the community. In the other hand, Thompson had a journal in which she had a detailed description of what had happened. As an anthropologist, she has to keep detailed records of what she observes and provided her with deep insights about the culture she is studying. Thus, when the policemen showed up to the town, she not only decided to deny any knowledge about the incident, but she also hid her journal. By doing so, Thompson was following clauses five and six of the ethical statement – “Make Results Accessible” and “Protect and Preserve Records.” Clause five states that any results must be accessible in a timely manner and to the right persons, because any results may not be clear to everybody, opening the door for multiple interpretations (Laporte 2012). In addition, this clause states that in order to protect participants or