This chapter investigates a conflicting understanding of beneficence – between the views held by contemporary artists and artistic researchers and the principle of beneficence enshrined in The National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research, 2007 (Updated 2018) (National Statement), the code of behaviour that underpins the ethical conduct of research within Australian universities. The National Statement defines beneficence as the minimisation of harm and discomfort to research subjects and participants. Contemporary artists, on the other hand, propose that art’s beneficence may necessarily incorporate provocation and discomfort in order to illuminate the important ethical issues of our epoch. This ‘conflict’ in understanding is not at issue until those artists enter the academy and undertake higher research degrees where they are required to negotiate the ethics process. It raises the questions: What are the ethical and aesthetic stakes involved in producing provocative and discomforting art when art becomes research? What are the challenges for artistic researchers working in the academy? and What are the issues for the ethics committees that have oversight over artistic research? Through an examination of the artistic performance events Nothing to See Here (Dispersal) and Say Nothing, artworks involving the artistic researcher Amy Spiers, this chapter addresses the question of ethics and beneficence in art and sets out some of the implications for artistic research in the academy.