Jean-Guy A. Goulet
The mention of such criteria concerning newly defined appropri-
ate ways to design and implement research projects involving aborig-
inal peoples is significant in and of itself. As underlined by Weber-Pill-
wax ( 2004 , 80 ),
When a researcher assumes that the ethics guidelines of a hypo-
thetical “research community” can take precedence over those of
a real community of people (real faces and real bodies) situated
in space and time, this surely constitutes a breach of ethics and
ought to raise serious questions about the research itself. Where
a researcher cannot discern and does not recognize what lies in
the space between the ethical world of the hypothetical “research
community” and the ethical world of the real community, s/he will
be unable to take such critical information into account in the re-
search project being conducted. Logically, the existence of such a
knowledge gap would call into question the findings, results, prod-
ucts, and outcomes from such research.The process alluded to here is one of discernment leading to a shift in
research paradigm. In the following pages, I illustrate what it means
to act upon critical information received in situ, from the real people
among whom one acts as human being and research. The case mate-
rial is offered as one contribution to ongoing efforts to formulate na-
tional ethical guidelines for research involving aboriginal peoples that
takes into account their concerns, priorities, and many realities.
With the publication in 1998 of the Tri-Council Policy Statement:
Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (tcps), the three Ca-
nadian Research Councils announced that from then on they would
“consider funding [or continue funding] only to individuals and insti-
tutions which certify compliance with this policy regarding research
involving human subjects” (tcps 2003, I).^3 When it came to research
involving aboriginal people, however, the councils determined that
it was not yet “appropriate to establish policies in this area” since
they had “not held sufficient discussions with representatives of the
affected peoples or groups, or with the various organizations or
researchers involved” (tcps 2003, 6. 1 ). In 1998 , the Tri-Council
Policy Statement therefore called for an extensive dialogue between