In this article, the authors comment on Hugh Foot's article on student research and ethics ["Psychology Teaching Review," 12(1), 82-86 (2006)] The authors agree with Foot that there is no case for accepting less stringent ethical criteria when the researcher is a student. However, they argue that greater attention and more stringent measures should be applied to student research as students are still undergoing research training. The authors find that their students inevitably can be attracted to "sensational" real world research areas that require extra sensitivity, and, while they are loathe to restrict their freedoms in choosing their own research topics for their final-year projects, they are aware of the problems this can entail. Like Hugh Foot, they also feel there is a need for ethical review of classroom practical work. In the authors' division, all proposed practical research is submitted by the session leader to the Ethics and Risk Committee for consideration. Only after approval would these practicals be incorporated into the teaching curriculum. However, the authors mention that out of such process, three issues have come up on which they would welcome input. These are (1) the issue of withdrawal of data; (2) the issue of confidentiality in qualitative research; and (3) the notion of not requiring undergraduate students conducting their final year projects to undergo Criminal Record Bureau checks.