Clinical adolescent decision-making: parental perspectives on confidentiality and consent in Belgium and The Netherlands

IF 1.8 3区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Ethics & Behavior Pub Date : 2022-06-15 DOI:10.1080/10508422.2022.2086873
Jana Vanwymelbeke, D. De Coninck, K. Matthijs, K. Van Leeuwen, Steven Lierman, Ingrid Boone, Peter de Winter, J. Toelen
{"title":"Clinical adolescent decision-making: parental perspectives on confidentiality and consent in Belgium and The Netherlands","authors":"Jana Vanwymelbeke, D. De Coninck, K. Matthijs, K. Van Leeuwen, Steven Lierman, Ingrid Boone, Peter de Winter, J. Toelen","doi":"10.1080/10508422.2022.2086873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study investigated Belgian and Dutch parental opinions on confidentiality and consent regarding medical decisions about adolescents. Through an online survey, we presented six cases (three on confidentiality, and three on consent) to 1,382 Belgian and Dutch parents. We studied patterns in parental confidentiality and consent preferences across and between cases through binomial logistic regressions and latent class analysis. Participants often grant the right to consent for a treatment to the adolescent, but the majority diverges from the adolescent’s preferences regarding confidentiality. More educated participants would rather not be informed about cases regarding a sexually transmitted disease or depression than lower educated participants. Further analysis shows that participants’ preferences correspond to authoritative (47%), permissive (30%) and authoritarian (17%) parenting styles. Belgian and Dutch parents are willing to grant some degree of autonomy, but they want to be informed about specific health issues. Parental views on confidentiality and granting consent appear to mirror existing parenting styles.","PeriodicalId":47265,"journal":{"name":"Ethics & Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics & Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2022.2086873","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study investigated Belgian and Dutch parental opinions on confidentiality and consent regarding medical decisions about adolescents. Through an online survey, we presented six cases (three on confidentiality, and three on consent) to 1,382 Belgian and Dutch parents. We studied patterns in parental confidentiality and consent preferences across and between cases through binomial logistic regressions and latent class analysis. Participants often grant the right to consent for a treatment to the adolescent, but the majority diverges from the adolescent’s preferences regarding confidentiality. More educated participants would rather not be informed about cases regarding a sexually transmitted disease or depression than lower educated participants. Further analysis shows that participants’ preferences correspond to authoritative (47%), permissive (30%) and authoritarian (17%) parenting styles. Belgian and Dutch parents are willing to grant some degree of autonomy, but they want to be informed about specific health issues. Parental views on confidentiality and granting consent appear to mirror existing parenting styles.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
临床青少年决策:父母对保密和同意在比利时和荷兰的观点
摘要:本研究调查了比利时和荷兰父母对青少年医疗决定的保密和同意意见。通过一项在线调查,我们向1382名比利时和荷兰父母展示了6个案例(3个关于保密,3个关于同意)。我们通过二项逻辑回归和潜在类分析研究了父母保密和同意偏好的模式。参与者通常授予青少年同意治疗的权利,但大多数人在保密方面偏离了青少年的偏好。与受教育程度较低的参与者相比,受教育程度较高的参与者不愿被告知有关性传播疾病或抑郁症的情况。进一步分析表明,参与者的偏好对应于权威型(47%)、宽容型(30%)和权威型(17%)的育儿方式。比利时和荷兰的父母愿意给予孩子一定程度的自主权,但他们希望了解具体的健康问题。父母对保密和同意的看法似乎反映了现有的育儿方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ethics & Behavior
Ethics & Behavior Multiple-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
期刊最新文献
Publication pressure and questionable research practices: a moderated mediation model Exploring educators’ epistemological worldviews and their influence on pedagogical decision-making in scientific ethics education at Malaysian universities Cultural perspectives on academic dishonesty: exploring racial and ethnic diversity in higher education The impact of perception of school moral atmosphere on college students’ moral sensitivity Educator experiences with postgraduate psychology students exhibiting professional competence issues
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1