take a breather. It is recommended too to have buddy or co-facilitator who will be responsible to tap out as the researcher takes a breather. Atty. Rubin (GEWHRC) added that to recognize different views, they have to be clear with biases and objectives and to recognize aggression and ways to manage it. She cited the instance when there is micro aggression from the local government, jails and from homophobic jail guards. She stated that part of the way forward or follow-through activities of CHR, will be to dismiss that this not part of the current topic as they may not be exposed or aware on the sensitivities but can be addressed in future capacity building activities either from the Policy, Protection or Promotion. In any case, such can still serve as data and as basis of future interventions sand partnerships. On dealing with challenges to reliability and validity Atty. Petrarch Torrato (CHR-R06) asked the lecturer if she had encountered an informant or participants whose narratives are not credible or are allegedly ‘lies’. He inquired on ways in dealing with such case. Dr. Laguilles-Timog maintained that in conducting feminist research, it is assumed that you gather the right people to ask and you believe them. She pointed out that, to prevent the problem on credibility of narratives, there are many points of intervention: from research design, criteria for selection of participants, getting the right informants or participants, asking the right questions; to probing and asking clarificatory questions. She said a way to address this is through triangulation of research method by looking at facts beyond the experience and narratives. Too, the fact that some participants or informants are ‘lying’ can be a data too, and should be noted and further investigated. Ms. Nancy Parreño (GBVO Consultant) gave her opinion from the point of view of researcher and of a social worker. In research, the results contributed to the knowledge but does not get to the TRUTH. The stories are variable and are not there to establish the TRUTH but to contribute to knowledge on the situation and serve as basis for action or policy directions. From the point of view of social worker, seeming ‘lying’ of clients is to be viewed in that they do not see to be in their best interest to tell the truth. It then becomes the burden of the social worker to find out the reasons for ‘lying’ or giving false or withholding information and the basis of client’s worries, fears, lack of trust, and the feeling that the system cannot help them. Social workers even avoid labelling it as lying as this can increase the fear or distrust and focus on the objective to find out the facts around the narrative for them to determine the most appropriate assistance and protection. She added that such can be considered in dealing with the concern on credibility of participants or informants narratives. 34