Ethical dilemmas are part and parcel of a PhD. I get it! But sometimes when I sit down and think about my PhD topic, I feel like mine really is fraught with a number of really complicated ethical dilemmas that are built into the fabric of the subject matter.
So this week I have been trying think and read about methods and methodologies, and as per usual when I start a new mini lit review I am confused.
Currently I am working with two research questions:
1. Why do LGBT+ young people have heightened rates of suicidal thoughts and behaviours when compared to their cisgender, heterosexual peers?
2. Does social connectedness, isolation, and broadly a sense of community influence those suicidal thoughts and behaviours, and if so how?
And a kind of whispered third question which goes something like this:
3. What kind of prevention and/or intervention work might help?
Every four weeks I write a mini literature review for my supervisors, they read through it, give me some written feedback, and then we discuss it. It’s been really helpful for getting me to write and research in the way expected in public health (which I had no clue about). Mostly the mini lit reviews have been about me working out what topic I want to focus on, coming to common understandings of topics with my supervisors, and finding away to justify my focus and my definitions. But I am really excited at the moment because I am getting to focus on theory and methods, and starting to think about what I am going to do for my field work.