4 one page evaluations for 4 papers due in 12 hours.

As I began reading the four case studies, I had realized just how new I must be to anthropology and anthropological research. I had always believed anthropology was mostly about research on the history of homo-sapiens and our previous ancestors. The depth in research with regards to the regulations and ethics for modern humans was unfounded by me.

As I go into thinking about how to consider the rules of anthropological research with virgin eyes and thoughts, I have to imagine a world without any regulations. Undoubtedly, researchers would push the limits of their research and more likely than less would perform experiments which would be looked upon as unethical against the human race. This world nevertheless could be filled with outstanding research and benefits to the human race, but at the cost of innocent people’s privacy, beliefs, and even possibly their lives. One may argue that anthropologists even without these rules and regulations would act morally correct and not push the limits of their research. However, it just doesn't seem possible as even now with present review boards for anthropology research that certain studies and experiments are to be unjustly performed innocently or knowingly as seen in case studies 1-3.

Of course an inverse thought, which would be a world filled with the strictest of rules and regulations would just be bound to simple and non-constructive research. As seen in the fourth case study, even with current rules that try not to limit potential research, studies can become elongated and even limited to who can be interviewed or studied. This lawful world just seems too locked up for a type of research that involves humans who have free thought and independent actions which could never be assessed by only observational study.

With these two ideas in mind, I find the issue and difficulty of finding the right balance for freedom of research and respect for human rights. Without doubt this is why review boards have been placed over anthropology researchers. It's hard if not impossible to create a set of common rules that will be considered perfect for research and ensure protection of all. However, it is possible that one set of rules can always be fairer than another.

From my understanding with most forms or research, many studies done seem to be considered acceptable as long as consent of the studied party is agreed upon. This is a rule I believe should be enforced and is being forced now in review boards. With this rule, researchers are allowed to perform a vast amount of studies as long as they can provide sufficient reason for their research and gain the approved and understood consent of those being studied. As long as researchers can explain and get their point across for research, I believe most people and societies would agree to help and participate in benefiting research for the human race. To insure this rule is followed and that studied parties are informed of all parts of research, strong laws and fines should be placed to insure that acts against the human race are always in consideration. This allows the largest possible amount of freedom researches could possibly have without putting human respect at risk.

One rule however, which cannot be broken even with the fullest of consent of a person or persons, is bringing harm to any human. Harming or even doing experiments on another human seems unethical in all senses and breaks any human dignity a researcher may have. Although there could be beneficial results to such research, there just seems something innately immoral about doing harm to another for the sake of research.

Also all researchers should propose there potential studies to their designated review board. The review boards for these researchers should also understand and as well help promote such studies. If an administration would like to be supported and respected, all review boards should respond and cooperate with researchers to get their studies completed. Although this could never be lawfully enforced, if true anthropology was to be promoted it would have to be by the fullest support of review boards. By fullest support I am expecting review boards to

Letter D, Page 1

provide timely responses for approval of research, ways in which researchers can get denied proposals approved, and an unbiased review of the proposed research being evaluated.

Although there are many other rules and concepts that can be brought up about the subject, I feel fundamentally these ideas are necessary for the freedom and respect of research is done in a positive and beneficial way.

Letter D, Page 2