![wallhaven-576805[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/1kulPgn.jpg "wallhaven-576805[1].jpg")
Hi /b/tards I have a little experiment that I'd like you to participate in. As the wonderful well read individuals that you surely are how would you deal with this situation?
You are a psychotherapist at a friend’s party when a fellow guest at the party asks you for the name of an electrician. Another guest mentions the name of a man who happened to be a patient of yours. The patient has a prison record and has recently been arrested for a series of house break-ins and thefts. He shows little remorse for the harm he has caused. You feel considerable tension when you hear this comment.
Discuss the ethical dilemma, bonus points for citing literature, other dilemma issues, philosophy etc. Also loli.
>>768004332
Give your friend the name of an electrician. There are like a million.
>>768004332
Tell the patient that his name was mentioned in the given context. Inform him that if that house is burglarized you will stand to witness unto the law.
As far as I'm aware that wouldn't breach patient confidentiality.
>>768004773
At lease in Canada, patient confidentiality can be broken if the patient is a threat to him/herself, others, or is engaging in illegal activity
>>768005037
>>768004773
*least
>>768004332
I wouldn't give a shit. It wouldn't be my stuff getting stolen.
>>768004332
>>768004773
>>768005037
His arrest would be a matter of public record. Would mentioning his arrest at the party in an off-hand way even be a breach of confidentiality?
"I heard that guy was a burglar.".
In thst situation i would go and find a job that didnt involve being a sweater wearing sissy.
>>768005194
How's your relationship with your father?
![wallhaven-331488[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/FjY2bMR.jpg "wallhaven-331488[1].jpg")
OP here
>>768004773
I think that is a great way of protecting both parties and keeping ethics intact.
>>768005037
Under most practices of psychology ethics can only be broken (ie someone told you something in confidence which you then report) if the person is at risk of hurting themselves or someone else.
>>768005144
I guess you could say that if you didn't like the person you wouldn't say anything.
>>768005191
I think that would be a bit shady as how would you have come across this data, and who would go and verify your statement?
>>768005191
>I heard that guy was a burglar
You said you would stand witness in court, should the house be burglarized, but doing so would be a breach in confidentiality, as you would need to provide substantial evidence. Correct me if I’m wrong, just don’t be all rude about it. I’m aware that I’m not that informed on the subject.
>>768005506
with regard to
>>768005191
Good point. I suppose a well placed local newspaper could come in handy... depending on the size of your community.
>>768005652
I'm not saying I'm completely right but I'm arguing that:
Informing the patient that in the case of his harming an acquaintance of yours you will no longer keep him as a patient but rather outright witness against him is not a breach of ethics because:
a) Burglary constitutes harm to others and at a stretch arguably oneself.
b) You have a right to drop patients from your practice should you feel uncomfortable treating them. Of course this decision must be well reasoned.
Regarding the need for substantial evidence, there I feel that you have a good point. While witnesses aren't cold hard proof I'm inclined to believe, and would argue, that constituting a witness in the resulting criminal case post-burglary renders you inept as the criminals therapist.
![wallhaven-443936[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/CNdNp2g.jpg "wallhaven-443936[1].jpg")
OP here
>>768006259
How would you go about tackling this problem if the patient is no longer under your care?
bumping for interest
>>768006560
That would depend on the manner in which he fell out of my care and the nature of my clinical practice. Could you specify or give an example?
![wallhaven-644182[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/TH1sUpY.jpg "wallhaven-644182[1].jpg")
OP here
>>768006697
Say for example that:
He used to be a patient of yours and you knew of his criminal background and found out he has no remorse for previous crimes. You see him in the news paper as being arrested recently but not charged even though you think that he probably did commit the offenses at it fits his profile.
>>768004332
screw you OP, I'm not writing your final paper for you. Get your own goddamn degree.
>>768004332
i dont give a fuck. i have a slight of intelligence and brain power which makes me older than most of you retards here. i can understand 4chan before even having been on the site. You can't. All you can do is repeat random garbage because thats all you are. Basically what im trying to say is you're a fucking faggot.
>>768007128
I would not react to that situation at all.
Acting on that information means that I would have to, at my own initiative, offer myself up to aid in a judicial charge against my former patient based on my personal and fallible assumptions both in matters of law, the patients person and psychology in general.
This would not be an academic pursuit. It would be a relatively baseless judicial act and politically contrarian to the base assumptions of a democratic state. There would be no clinical value.
As such I couldn't in good conscience act against my former patient unless I were compelled by the court.
![wallhaven-305372[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/dHyf7QN.jpg "wallhaven-305372[1].jpg")
OP here
>>768007328
I wish it was my final paper.
>>768007503
You must be new here, I guarantee that I'm more of an oldfag than you are summer kid.
bump
>>768007867
i dont give a fuck. i have a slight of intelligence and brain power which makes me older than most of you retards here. i can understand 4chan before even having been on the site. You can't. All you can do is repeat random garbage because thats all you are. Basically what im trying to say is you're a fucking faggot.
fresh oc from a different bread
it was glorious
massively triggered by tits or gtfo
His criminal record is public information, you can warn them without breaking any kind of patient-client confidentiality
>>768005506
>I think that would be a bit shady as how would you have come across this data, and who would go and verify your statement?
just say that he is (or was) your patient, and don't say anything else about him because privacy
well, that'd be the case if shrinks were real doctors and not just dealers/scammers
![wallhaven-153473[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/4YyATAR.jpg "wallhaven-153473[1].jpg")
OP here
>>768007765
>offer myself up to aid in a judicial charge against my former patient
But it is at a party not in the police station. The dilemma is whether to tell the person at said party about his criminal background and potential threat. Not bringing charges against the patient himself
>>768004480
/thread