Education is a fundamental process of human life with ethics having an important place in all areas of our life. It is thus important to incorporate ethics into education as a subject. Reports have indicated in how “teaching philosophy can enhance people’s capacity for critical thinking, encourage critical engagements with ideas of self, and improve interpersonal skills, with these being important transferable skills that could help prisoners to prosper once released”. This is in line with the South African prison system’s (...) mandate, which is to maintain and promote a just, peaceful and safe society by correcting offending behaviour in a safe, secure and human environment, thus facilitating optimal rehabilitation and reduced repeat offending. Therefore, for the system to fulfil some of its mandate; ethics education in prison for the purpose of rehabilitating offender’s moral thinking and reasoning in order to correct their behaviour before being released is vital. Ethics training was done at the Johannesburg Correctional Service, with a maximum of 40 voluntary participants. Training was dived into three categories: 1. Tutorials. 2. Practical application of moral values of Ubuntu. 3. Discussion and debating another set of moral values as well as writing of assignments. Participants reported to have gained and learned to respect themselves as well as others, identify their faults and gained self-confidence. Application of this method in ethics education proved to be well received by the participants, as well as how ethics training in prison might be used as an effective tool for moral development and reasoning, thereby rehabilitation. (shrink)

Purpose We examine the levels of post-trial responsibility ascribed to different stakeholders, following a community-based clinical trial and how the ‘responsibility’ is understood. Methods We employed photovoice, unstructured observations and key informant interviews to gain insights into contexts of access to care following transition to the public health system post trial. We used an inductive narrative analysis to explore experiences and understandings of post-trial access. Results In their photovoice stories, many participants expressed a sense of abandonment after the trial. This (...) was viewed as a contributing factor to failing to re-engage with care available in the public health system. This led to the experiences of loss as some trial participants defaulted and died. Research investigators, department of health participants and sponsor agreed that PTA was especially important for communities in resource-limited settings. The government has an obligation towards its citizens while researchers have a responsibility to ensure a smooth transition of patients to public clinics. Sponsors have a responsibility to ensure that the trial is conducted in accordance with the protocol and post-trial agreements are in place and adhered to. Research partnerships among stakeholders were affected by power imbalances making it difficult to negotiate and plan for post-trial care responsibilities. Conclusions The research community still struggles with understanding the scope of PTA responsibilities. Power dynamics between public health actors and research sponsors need to be managed to ensure that government involvement is not tokenistic. The responsibility of trial participants and ethics committees needs to be investigated further. Data are available upon request. (shrink)