That research is important, we all know. In the clinical world, it is needed to elaborate theories that are used to develop treatment models. Thanks to the commitment to science in most western countries, there are today reliable treatment options for those who struggle with mental disturbances. In the field of trauma, leading international experts are making a meaningful difference in the lives of those who survive terrible experiences. Today there are effective treatment models that promote long-term healing; however, these have been designed based on studies in non-African populations which raises the ethical and clinical question about the effectiveness of those treatment methodologies for our target population.

In a recent literature research we conducted, we found only 14 published trauma intervention studies in post-war/ post- genocide African countries, only one of which was in Liberia. What sounded promising and exciting for our program, soon became a great concern: over 2,000 liberians were interviewed for post-traumatic symptoms over a period of 2 weeks by foreign professionals who most likely were visiting Liberia for the first time, and probably will never return.

That raised many questions for our team. The data and statistics looked great on paper, although we are aware that their interviewing method could have easily skewed the results due to the influence of sponsorship, financial support, etc., on the research participants. But this is not our main concern. As we know, interviewing survivors about traumatic stress symptoms can trigger a psychological crisis that should be handled by trained professionals. The fact is that with one psychiatrist and no masters level clinicians, there are not enough professionals in Liberia to provide clinical services for that many research participants.

The researchers who conducted this study represent one of the most respected academic institutions in the world. They are not the first, and

will not be the last to fly into Africa for a few days to collect data for their studies. It is easy after all: local policies on subject rights and protection are still being elaborated, and researchers with a printed copy of a detailed informed consent feel they have met those rights based on their own international standards.

In our own research projects and aspirations, we ask ourselves two questions: 1) How is this project going to benefit the participants, and 2) Which international standards should apply? Research standards do aim to protect the subject’s rights and physical/ emotional safety when volunteering to participate and we abide to it. However the concept of research and science is perhaps not properly understood by the locals. For them, as we have experienced, it means that by answering a few questions, they will receive food or money for their time. They may tell you they understand the guidelines and questions even if they do not in order to get the benefits they need that will feed their children for another week.

When we think of benefits for our participants, we are not looking at compensation for their time, and a strategy that has worked for us is to only interview those simply motivated by our desire to develop a treatment to help their emotional disturbances. We found that by doing that instead of giving temporary incentives, we get in exchange reliable data we can trust.

We believe that clinical reseach in Liberia is a delicate process. It must be carefully planned and developed over the long term. It must be led and supervised by trained Liberian professionals who can speak the local languages and explain the questions in a way that would be understood. Measurements, diagnostic tools and interviews must be designed, adapted and translated in a way that is culturally appropriate for the population, and appropriate clinical support must be made available to assure the emotional safety of each participant.