In this response, we first tackle what we take to be the core disagreement between ourselves and Hammersley, namely the justification for our model of social research ethics governance. We then consider what follows from our defence of governance for ethics review and show how these claims attend to the specific concerns outlined by Hammersley.

Additional Metadata
Persistent URL dx.doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2018-104975, hdl.handle.net/1765/119960
Journal Journal of Medical Ethics: an international peer-reviewed journal for health professionals and researchers in medical ethics
Citation
Sheehan, M., Dunn, M, & Sahan, K.M. (2018). Reasonable disagreement and the justification of pre-emptive ethics governance in social research: a response to Hammersley. Journal of Medical Ethics: an international peer-reviewed journal for health professionals and researchers in medical ethics. doi:10.1136/medethics-2018-104975