AO: While we were going over the options covered within the consent form after the interview, this individual, who throughout the interview was all for openness, was also very willing to be named and did not see a reason to be anonymized. However, as I was uploading the consent form into this RDS platform, I grappled with whether or not to leave them named or use my researcher's perogative to anonymize them. I eventually opted to redact the name from the consent form because all of the other interviews conducted with individuals within the organization were anonymized as per the research participants' wishes. Naming this person would lead to the research organization easily being identified. Once the research organization was identified, it would be much easier to potentially identify the other research participants interviewed. Therefore, unlike some of the other cases (link to this focus group where some participants explicitly stated their desire to be named) where I decided not to over-ride the wishes of the research participants stated desire to be named as I did not believe there was a risk for others to be identified in the group, in this case, I decided to exert my researcher's perogative and redact the name in order to protect those who wished to remain anonymous.
