{"title":"行为干预小组应对大学生自杀的保密性和潜在残疾歧视问题","authors":"Emily M. Lund","doi":"10.1177/10442073221094808","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In response to concerns about liability and safety, many colleges and universities have instituted Behavior Intervention Teams (BITs) to help assess and intervene with students who may pose a risk of harm to self or others. Students, lawyers, and advocates have raised concerns about some aspects of the implementation of BITs and related institutional policies, particularly with regard to students who are suicidal and those who engage in self-injurious behavior. Specifically, BITs are on complicated legal ground regarding confidentiality, disability civil rights law, and potential discriminatory or disparate treatment of students with psychiatric disabilities. In addition to reviewing the nature and background of BITs, this article reviews the professional, ethical, and legal issues surrounding confidentiality in the context of university intervention with students who are at risk for harm to self and the potentially applicable of disability civil rights law to BIT intervention with students who are suicidal. Suggestions for alternative and supplemental interventions, especially widespread use of suicide gatekeeping, are provided. Finally, the need for advocates who are knowledgeable in disability civil rights law is highlighted.","PeriodicalId":46868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","volume":"33 1","pages":"209 - 219"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Issues of Confidentiality and Potential Disability Discrimination in Behavior Intervention Team Responses to College Student Suicidality\",\"authors\":\"Emily M. Lund\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10442073221094808\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In response to concerns about liability and safety, many colleges and universities have instituted Behavior Intervention Teams (BITs) to help assess and intervene with students who may pose a risk of harm to self or others. Students, lawyers, and advocates have raised concerns about some aspects of the implementation of BITs and related institutional policies, particularly with regard to students who are suicidal and those who engage in self-injurious behavior. Specifically, BITs are on complicated legal ground regarding confidentiality, disability civil rights law, and potential discriminatory or disparate treatment of students with psychiatric disabilities. In addition to reviewing the nature and background of BITs, this article reviews the professional, ethical, and legal issues surrounding confidentiality in the context of university intervention with students who are at risk for harm to self and the potentially applicable of disability civil rights law to BIT intervention with students who are suicidal. Suggestions for alternative and supplemental interventions, especially widespread use of suicide gatekeeping, are provided. Finally, the need for advocates who are knowledgeable in disability civil rights law is highlighted.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46868,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Disability Policy Studies\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"209 - 219\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Disability Policy Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073221094808\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073221094808","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Issues of Confidentiality and Potential Disability Discrimination in Behavior Intervention Team Responses to College Student Suicidality
In response to concerns about liability and safety, many colleges and universities have instituted Behavior Intervention Teams (BITs) to help assess and intervene with students who may pose a risk of harm to self or others. Students, lawyers, and advocates have raised concerns about some aspects of the implementation of BITs and related institutional policies, particularly with regard to students who are suicidal and those who engage in self-injurious behavior. Specifically, BITs are on complicated legal ground regarding confidentiality, disability civil rights law, and potential discriminatory or disparate treatment of students with psychiatric disabilities. In addition to reviewing the nature and background of BITs, this article reviews the professional, ethical, and legal issues surrounding confidentiality in the context of university intervention with students who are at risk for harm to self and the potentially applicable of disability civil rights law to BIT intervention with students who are suicidal. Suggestions for alternative and supplemental interventions, especially widespread use of suicide gatekeeping, are provided. Finally, the need for advocates who are knowledgeable in disability civil rights law is highlighted.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Disability Policy Studies addresses compelling, variable issues in ethics, policy, and law related to individuals with disabilities. A major focus is quantitative and qualitative policy research. Articles have implications in fields such as education, law, sociology, public health, family studies, medicine, social work, and public administration. Occasional special series discuss current problems or areas needing more in-depth research, for example, disability and aging, policy concerning families of children with disabilities, oppression and disability, school violence policies and interventions, and systems change in supporting individuals with disabilities.