• Traditional consent models often rely on adult 鈥減roxies鈥� such as parents and schools

• Children and young people鈥檚 ability to make informed decisions is frequently underestimated

• Complex, legalistic consent documents can discourage participation

• Schools play a central but under-recognised role in shaping access to research

• Current systems can create 鈥渆pistemic injustice鈥�, limiting whose voices are heard

• A more flexible, participatory and culturally sensitive approach is needed

Why consent isn鈥檛 working for children

The paper argues that gaining consent in studies involving children is often treated as a legal formality, rather than a meaningful process.

Current systems tend to prioritise institutional requirements such as ethics approvals and documentation over children鈥檚 own understanding and experiences.

Children are frequently positioned as needing protection, but this can come at the cost of recognising their competence. Evidence shows that many children and adolescents are capable of understanding research and making informed choices, particularly as digital literacy increases.

The hidden role of schools

Schools play a crucial role in research, acting as gatekeepers between researchers, children and families.

They are often responsible for sharing information, managing communication and enabling access - but their capacity to do this varies widely depending on time, resources and infrastructure.

In many cases, researchers have little direct contact with parents, relying instead on school systems to distribute information. While this helps with logistics, it can dilute communication and affect how well families understand what participation involves.

When paperwork puts people off

The article highlights how long, complex consent forms, often shaped by legal and data protection requirements, can discourage participation.

For families, particularly those from diverse linguistic or cultural backgrounds, these documents can be difficult to understand and may even create unnecessary concern about risk.

This can lead to what researchers describe as 鈥渆pistemic injustice鈥�, where children and young people are effectively excluded from contributing to knowledge because the process itself is inaccessible.

Children as active participants - not passive subjects

The researchers argue that children should be recognised as capable social actors, able to express views and make decisions about research participation.

Rather than relying solely on parental consent, approaches should support children鈥檚 own understanding, including their right to agree - or refuse - to take part.

This aligns with wider principles that children have the right to be heard in decisions affecting them.

What needs to change

The paper proposes a shift towards a more flexible and inclusive model of consent, built around real-world relationships and contexts.

Changes researchers are calling for

• Consent as an ongoing process

• Consent should be revisited throughout a study, not treated as a one-off decision

• Better communication

• Materials should be clearer, shorter and accessible to both children and families

• Schools as partners

• Schools should be supported as collaborators, not just intermediaries

• Children鈥檚 voices at the centre

• Processes should actively include children鈥檚 views, including opportunities to dissent

• More culturally sensitive approaches

• Consent models should reflect diverse social and cultural contexts

Why this matters now

The researchers argue that improving consent processes is not just an ethical issue - it directly affects the quality, inclusivity and impact of research.

When children and young people are excluded or disengaged, important perspectives are lost, particularly from underrepresented groups.

More inclusive approaches could help build trust, improve participation and ensure research better reflects the realities of children鈥檚 lives.

What the researchers said

鈥淐urrent consent processes often prioritise systems and structures over the children they are designed to protect,鈥� said lead author Dr Sarah MacQuarrie.

They add that consent should be seen as 鈥渁n ongoing, relational process鈥� rather than a one-time administrative step.

Final word

The article concludes that traditional, standardised models of consent are no longer fit for purpose in research with children and young people.

Instead, it calls for a reimagining of consent as a flexible, inclusive and participatory process - one which ensures that children鈥檚 voices are not just heard, but are central to research itself.

Publication details

The article is a part of a special issue within the Methods in Psychology journal.

DOI: