Rachelle E. Thannhauser, Zoe A. Morris, Nicholas Gamble
{"title":"青少年治疗工作中的知情同意、保密和从业者披露:对从业者观点的系统回顾","authors":"Rachelle E. Thannhauser, Zoe A. Morris, Nicholas Gamble","doi":"10.1007/s40894-021-00173-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Mental health practitioners provide therapeutic interventions to youth on a daily basis, yet sparse research exists to inform ethical decision-making. It is commonly understood that therapeutic work with youth is ethically complex especially when considering informed consent and confidentiality, both of which have practical limitations. This review synthesized literature which reported practitioners’ perspectives (e.g., psychologists, social workers) on ethical decision-making about informed consent and confidentiality in therapeutic work with youth. Specifically, this review aimed to amalgamate relevant professional perspectives on work with youth who may be considered “Mature Minors” or “Gillick Competent,” indications of capacity to consent to intervention. Included studies (<i>n</i> = 25) largely originated in North America (40%), suggesting an underrepresentation of culturally diverse practitioners and help-seeking youth in available literature. Most studies concentrated on confidentiality (72%) and few considered decision-making related to informed consent. Adolescent risk-behavior and related potential for harm were prevalent factors in practitioners’ decision-making. This review demonstrates that practitioners endorse disparate decision-making factors and are limited in consensus to breach confidentiality. As such, practitioners demonstrate variance in approach to working with this developmentally vulnerable population.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45912,"journal":{"name":"Adolescent Research Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Informed Consent, Confidentiality, and Practitioner Disclosure in Therapeutic Work with Youth: A Systematic Review of Practitioners’ Perspectives\",\"authors\":\"Rachelle E. Thannhauser, Zoe A. Morris, Nicholas Gamble\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40894-021-00173-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Mental health practitioners provide therapeutic interventions to youth on a daily basis, yet sparse research exists to inform ethical decision-making. It is commonly understood that therapeutic work with youth is ethically complex especially when considering informed consent and confidentiality, both of which have practical limitations. This review synthesized literature which reported practitioners’ perspectives (e.g., psychologists, social workers) on ethical decision-making about informed consent and confidentiality in therapeutic work with youth. Specifically, this review aimed to amalgamate relevant professional perspectives on work with youth who may be considered “Mature Minors” or “Gillick Competent,” indications of capacity to consent to intervention. Included studies (<i>n</i> = 25) largely originated in North America (40%), suggesting an underrepresentation of culturally diverse practitioners and help-seeking youth in available literature. Most studies concentrated on confidentiality (72%) and few considered decision-making related to informed consent. Adolescent risk-behavior and related potential for harm were prevalent factors in practitioners’ decision-making. This review demonstrates that practitioners endorse disparate decision-making factors and are limited in consensus to breach confidentiality. As such, practitioners demonstrate variance in approach to working with this developmentally vulnerable population.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45912,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Adolescent Research Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Adolescent Research Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40894-021-00173-2\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Adolescent Research Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40894-021-00173-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Informed Consent, Confidentiality, and Practitioner Disclosure in Therapeutic Work with Youth: A Systematic Review of Practitioners’ Perspectives
Mental health practitioners provide therapeutic interventions to youth on a daily basis, yet sparse research exists to inform ethical decision-making. It is commonly understood that therapeutic work with youth is ethically complex especially when considering informed consent and confidentiality, both of which have practical limitations. This review synthesized literature which reported practitioners’ perspectives (e.g., psychologists, social workers) on ethical decision-making about informed consent and confidentiality in therapeutic work with youth. Specifically, this review aimed to amalgamate relevant professional perspectives on work with youth who may be considered “Mature Minors” or “Gillick Competent,” indications of capacity to consent to intervention. Included studies (n = 25) largely originated in North America (40%), suggesting an underrepresentation of culturally diverse practitioners and help-seeking youth in available literature. Most studies concentrated on confidentiality (72%) and few considered decision-making related to informed consent. Adolescent risk-behavior and related potential for harm were prevalent factors in practitioners’ decision-making. This review demonstrates that practitioners endorse disparate decision-making factors and are limited in consensus to breach confidentiality. As such, practitioners demonstrate variance in approach to working with this developmentally vulnerable population.
期刊介绍:
Adolescent Research Review publishes articles that review important contributions to the understanding of adolescence. The Review draws from the many subdisciplines of developmental science, psychological science, education, criminology, public health, medicine, social work, and other allied disciplines that address the subject of youth and adolescence. The editors are especially interested in articles that bridge gaps between disciplines or that focus on topics that transcend traditional disciplinary boundaries. Reviews must be cutting edge and comprehensive in the way they advance science, practice or policy relating to adolescents.