A Professional Code of Conduct PAPER#2

The Ethics of Confidentiality

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

The Ethics of Confidentiality

Confidentiality is a controversial ethical issue in the practice of Psychotherapy and mental health care. The American Psychology Association requires all the practitioners to observe privacy regulations. The sensitive and personal information disclosed by patients in the treatment room should strictly remain confidential. In fact, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) demands maximum protection of patients’ medical records as well as their personal information. Some states have additional provisions to ensure their constituents’ personal information is not accessible to third parties.

Nonetheless, some cases, the terms of the privacy regulations may be compromised, orchestrating the sharing of the personal or medial information among psychiatrists, federal agents, and the public. Such situations can occur when the psychologist thinks it is necessary to protect the patient or the public from serious danger, when the patients are vulnerable to abuse or abandonment, and when practitioners are compelled to do so by a court order (Knapp & VandeCreek, 2012). Additionally, in case a patient is receiving medical cover or aid, basic information about the diagnosis might be shared to enlighten them about the care program and its costs. However, if a psychologist feels compelled to share a patient’s private information with a third party, then the latter must consent.

Significance to Psychology

Patient confidentiality is an important yet controversial issue in Psychology. All therapists, psychiatrists, and mental health caregivers are required by law to protect the privacy of their clients. Failure to adhere to these fundamental principles might lead to revocation of the practicing licenses and even attract penalties and jail terms. However, life coaches are not bound by any of the state privacy regulations, rather, by professional ethics.

The definitive meaning of confidentiality in psychology is not exclusively bound to the contents of the therapy or counseling. It also includes the attendance, telephone conversations, voicemails, and social media exchanges as well as or other forms of explicitly or implicitly provided information. For minor clients, the issue of confidentiality is a bit complicated, as parents may be informed about the progress or goals of the treatment, but the details will only be revealed if the consent of the minor is obtained.

Confidentiality is a crucial psychology provision all over the world; hence, exhaustive laws should be made in order to protect patients. Otherwise, the effectiveness of therapy and mental health care will be compromised considerably (Schlenker & Forsyth, 2015). Patients will refrain from sharing their information with the caregivers or desist from seeking psychological help in entirety. The healthcare professionals should also act ethically in the best interests of their clients as postulated by the theories below:

Ethical Egoism

The ethical egoism theory demands that one acts in his or her self-interest. According to the theory, the actions of an individual should serve only one purpose: to promote their well-being. For egoists, their self-interest is the compass with which they navigate the expansive scope of good and bad (Rachels, 2012). When applied to the field of psychology, ethical egoism would provide for the psychologist to uphold the privacy of client information only if they felt it would serve their self-interest. An egoist, therefore, would withhold information from third parties to protect the trust of a client. They argue that betraying their clients could be bad for business, leading to financial losses. The best interests of the psychologists are of insignificant consequence to the well-being of the patients and their loved ones.

State laws clearly differ with this approach of making decisions regarding the privacy of client information. Precisely, this theory overrides the provisions outlined by the American state laws as well as those of many other countries worldwide. Additionally, it infringes the well-being of the people seeking mental healthcare as well as the general society. Psychologists, therefore, should reject this approach, as it would either jeopardize their professional standings or land them in jail.

Utilitarianism

The utilitarianism theory promotes the “greatest good to the greatest number.” The moral compass of a utilitarian is based the interests of all parties. Besides, it seeks to foster benevolence-based judgment of good and bad. Proponents of the theory maintain that maximum utility should guide the actions of individuals in all their endeavors (Mill, 2016).

Applied to psychotherapy, a therapist would gauge if his or her action promotes the utmost good of the patient, his or her career, and the society in general. Correspondingly, the psychologists should not disclose the patient’s private details if the latter and his or her family will be harmed from the revelation. On the other hand, if revealing the information would lead to the greatest good, they would be compelled to share it, according to the utilitarian theory. State laws support this theory by virtue of the exceptions it provides. In my opinion, this theory is the most accurate and reasonable approach to decision-making and best practice.

Kant’s Ethics

According to Kant’s ethics, one should act or make decision based on their free will while still trying to observe or uphold a sense of duty to the universe. The decisions should be of the end result approach and not a means to an end (Louden, 2012; Wood, 2014). If for instance, a manager is trying to decide whether to dump garbage in front of his shop but chooses not to do so to avoid being fined, that would not be a Kant’s ethics approach to decision making. However, if he chose not to do it because it would be an environmental catastrophe if all managers in the world dumped their garbage carelessly, that would be a Kant’s ethics approach.

In Psychology, the practitioners would withhold critical information from third parties if they were convinced the decision upholds the best moral and ethical standards. According to the confidentiality regulations, the privacy of the patient should be protected without compromise. The free will of the practitioner has no place in the issue. Kant’s ethics theory rejects this kind of restriction. Personally, I believe privacy should be upheld, and it should not be the therapists’ decision to make.

Conclusion

Overall, the privacy of patients is of utmost significance to psychologists worldwide. Various legislations have been enacted place to guard the sensitive issue. The perspectives postulated by the egoism, utilitarianism, and Kant’s theories offer insight on the practicality or lack thereof of the regulations. I believe the patients’ privacy should be always upheld, if any discourse leads to adverse ramifications their interests. Notably, the utilitarian theory provides the most appropriate and applicable ideologies that could guide psychologies in the execution of confidentiality related matters.

References

Knapp, S. J., & VandeCreek, L. D. (2012). Practical ethics for psychologists: A positive approach. American Psychological Association.

Louden, R. B. (2012). Kant's impure ethics: from rational beings to human beings. Oxford University Press, USA.

Mill, J. S. (2016). Utilitarianism. In Seven Masterpieces of Philosophy (pp. 337-383). Routledge.

Rachels, J. (2012). Ethical egoism. Ethical Theory: An Anthology, 14, 193.

Schlenker, B. R., & Forsyth, D. R. (2015). On the ethics of psychological research. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13(4), 369-396.

Wood, A. W. (2014). Kant's ethical thought. Cambridge University Press.