DISCUSSION 1
In the realm of nursing research, understanding the legal and ethical dimensions is crucial for both the protection of participants and the integrity of the study. When examining published research, one expects to find a detailed account of the ethical considerations involved, including how participants’ rights were protected and how informed consent was obtained. This transparency not only reassures the reader of the ethical standards adhered to but also sets a benchmark for future studies to follow.

Contrastingly, the information prepared for an Institutional Review Board (IRB) submission is more comprehensive. The IRB requires detailed protocols to ensure participant safety, confidentiality measures, and a complete understanding of the study’s impact, including potential risks and benefits (Office for Human Research Protections, 2021). This includes, but is not limited to, detailed demographic information of participants, specific measures taken to minimize harm, and precise data handling procedures to ensure confidentiality and data integrity.

For instance, a published study might mention that “all participants gave informed consent,” and “data were anonymized to protect participant privacy” (Smith & Doe, 2023). However, the IRB submission would provide the actual consent forms used, describe the exact methods of data anonymization, and detail the steps taken to ensure that no unauthorized access to sensitive data occurs. From a research consumer’s perspective, the distinction between these two documents highlights the depth of ethical consideration and legal adherence required at different stages of research dissemination and approval. While the published research provides an overview, the IRB submission offers a granular view of the ethical framework guiding the research process.

DISCUSSION 2
The proposal of testing infants for HIV without parental consent or informing parents of results violates key ethical principles outlined in LoBiondo-Wood and Haber’s framework (2022). The right to self-determination is compromised, as mothers are neither informed nor allowed to consent (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 2022). This breaches the autonomy of the individual, a foundational principle in research ethics (Beauchamp & Childress, 2019).

The right to privacy and dignity is violated by conducting sensitive health tests without the mother’s knowledge (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 2022). The protocol neglects the right to protect from harm, since failing to inform parents of a positive HIV diagnosis will delays critical early treatment for infants (UNAIDS, 2023).

The findings of the study will be scrutinized due to ethical integrity, findings could be dismissed because of the research practices and could damage trust in healthcare providers.

Assessing for HIV prevalence is important but without proper informed consent and withholding results makes this protocol unethical.