In this paper, we present three ways of being in the field, with reference to the help which should or should not be granted to the anthropologist’s informants. The first is a classic Malinowskian stance of participant observation based on relativistic neutrality, objectivism, and a scientific attitude. Under this stance, helping the native informants is neither postulated nor justified. The next two attitudes are in contrast to the first, as they rely on the need to morally participate in the lives of the native collaborators. It is anchored in feminism, situated knowledge and postcolonial studies, among others. The second stance has a quixotic character: what matters in the field is the anthropologist's intention and the obligation to obtain the informed consent of their indigenous collaborators. The third attitude is more collaborative and long-term in nature. It is based on responsibility in the sense of Manuel Levinas and active care for those who need help and support. We will argue that the last attitude is preferable to the first two. The presentation will feature three different voices: an activist, a native collaborator and an anthropologist.