Urban American Indian and Alaska Native Data Sovereignty: Ethical Issues.

IF 1.9 4区心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health Research Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.5820/aian.2802.2021.77

Emily A Haozous, Juliet Lee, Claradina Soto

{"title":"Urban American Indian and Alaska Native Data Sovereignty: Ethical Issues.","authors":"Emily A Haozous, Juliet Lee, Claradina Soto","doi":"10.5820/aian.2802.2021.77","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper examines the ethical issues underlying research with urban American Indians and Alaska Natives (AI/ANs) through the lens of tribal sovereignty. There are 574 federally recognized tribes within the United States. Each of those tribes is recognized by the federal government as having sovereign status, an important political designation that ensures that decisions impacting tribal peoples must be made after consultation with those nations. Most AI/AN people live away from their designated tribal lands, yet their sovereign rights are frequently only recognized when living on tribal lands. These urban AI/ANs are still considered citizens of their sovereign nations, yet they lack the protections afforded to those who live on tribal lands, including protections surrounding research with their tribal communities. We explore the Belmont Report and related documents and demonstrate their inadequacy in considering the cultural and ethical concerns specific to protecting urban AI/ANs. We also provide several solutions to help guide future institutional policies regarding research with urban AI/ANs that honors Indigenous data sovereignty, including consultation, partnership with community advisory boards, employment of data use agreements, and ensuring informed consent.</p>","PeriodicalId":46147,"journal":{"name":"American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8877071/pdf/nihms-1775416.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5820/aian.2802.2021.77","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper examines the ethical issues underlying research with urban American Indians and Alaska Natives (AI/ANs) through the lens of tribal sovereignty. There are 574 federally recognized tribes within the United States. Each of those tribes is recognized by the federal government as having sovereign status, an important political designation that ensures that decisions impacting tribal peoples must be made after consultation with those nations. Most AI/AN people live away from their designated tribal lands, yet their sovereign rights are frequently only recognized when living on tribal lands. These urban AI/ANs are still considered citizens of their sovereign nations, yet they lack the protections afforded to those who live on tribal lands, including protections surrounding research with their tribal communities. We explore the Belmont Report and related documents and demonstrate their inadequacy in considering the cultural and ethical concerns specific to protecting urban AI/ANs. We also provide several solutions to help guide future institutional policies regarding research with urban AI/ANs that honors Indigenous data sovereignty, including consultation, partnership with community advisory boards, employment of data use agreements, and ensuring informed consent.

查看原文本刊更多论文

城市美国印第安人和阿拉斯加原住民数据主权：伦理问题。

本文从部落主权的角度探讨了对城市美国印第安人和阿拉斯加原住民（AI/ANs）进行研究的伦理问题。美国有 574 个联邦承认的部落。联邦政府承认这些部落中的每一个部落都拥有主权地位，这是一个重要的政治名称，它确保在做出影响部落人民的决策时必须与这些民族进行协商。大多数阿拉斯加原住民/印第安人居住在指定的部落土地之外，但他们的主权权利往往只有在部落土地上生活时才会得到承认。这些城市中的阿拉斯加原住民/印第安人仍被视为其主权国家的公民，但他们缺乏生活在部落土地上的人所享有的保护，包括围绕与部落社区的研究的保护。我们探讨了《贝尔蒙特报告》及相关文件，并证明它们在考虑保护城市阿拉斯加原住民所特有的文化和伦理问题时存在不足。我们还提供了几种解决方案，以帮助指导未来有关尊重土著数据主权的城市 AI/ANs 研究的机构政策，包括咨询、与社区咨询委员会合作、采用数据使用协议以及确保知情同意。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health Research PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-

CiteScore

2.20

自引率

30.80%

发文量

期刊介绍： American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health Research: The Journal of the National Center is a professionally refereed scientific journal. It contains empirical research, program evaluations, case studies, unpublished dissertations, and other articles in the behavioral, social, and health sciences which clearly relate to the mental health status of American Indians and Alaska Natives. All topical areas relating to this field are addressed, such as psychology, psychiatry, nursing, sociology, anthropology, social work, and specific areas of education, medicine, history, and law. Through a standardized format (American Psychological Association guidelines) new data regarding this special population is easier to retrieve, compare, and evaluate.