Double Secret Protection: Bridging Federal and State Law To Protect Privacy Rights for Telemental and Mobile Health Users

Mental health care in the United States is plagued by stigma, cost, and access issues that prevent many people from seeking and continuing treatment for mental health conditions. Emergent technology, however, may offer a solution. Through telemental health, patients can connect with providers remotely—avoiding stigmatizing situations that can arise from traditional healthcare delivery, receiving more affordable care, and reaching providers across geographic boundaries. And with mobile health technology, people can use smart phone applications both to self-monitor their mental health and to communicate with their doctors. But people do not want to take advantage of telemental and mobile health unless their privacy is protected. After evaluating the applicability of current health information privacy law to these new forms of treatment, this Note proposes changes to the federal regime to protect privacy rights for telemental and mobile health users

An exploration into the client at the heart of therapy : a qualitative perspective

Over 50 years ago Eysenck challenged the existing base of research into psychotherapy. Since that time, a large number of investigations have been conducted to verify the efficacy of therapy. Recently however, an increasing number of studies have cast new doubts on this research base. Instead of therapy being a function of the therapist, it is now becoming ever more apparent that the client plays a prime role in the therapeutic process. The qualitative studies presented in this paper provide some examples of research that demonstrates that clients are actively involved in their therapy, even making counselling work despite their counsellor. These studies suggest that clients may not experience therapy as beneficially as traditional outcome studies indicate. This raises a new challenge to researchers to more fully explore the client's experience of therapy, a challenge to which qualitative methods of inquiry would appear well suited

Double Secret Protection: Bridging Federal and State Law To Protect Privacy Rights for Telemental and Mobile Health Users

Mental health care in the United States is plagued by stigma, cost, and access issues that prevent many people from seeking and continuing treatment for mental health conditions. Emergent technology, however, may offer a solution. Through telemental health, patients can connect with providers remotely—avoiding stigmatizing situations that can arise from traditional healthcare delivery, receiving more affordable care, and reaching providers across geographic boundaries. And with mobile health technology, people can use smart phone applications both to self-monitor their mental health and to communicate with their doctors. But people do not want to take advantage of telemental and mobile health unless their privacy is protected. After evaluating the applicability of current health information privacy law to these new forms of treatment, this Note proposes changes to the federal regime to protect privacy rights for telemental and mobile health users

Cognitive behaviour therapy-trained staff’s views on professional accreditation

Many cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) trained mental health professionals seek non-mandatory accreditation with the British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies (BABCP), despite self-regulation of talking therapies being a divisive issue. This raises the question: what views do CBT-trained mental health professionals have towards BABCP accreditation and what motivates them to become accredited? This qualitative study recruited seven postgraduate CBT-trained mental health professionals from NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde during 2015. Individual semi-structured interviews were completed and verbatim transcripts produced. Thematic analysis revealed the value participants place on accreditation, and that an absence of motivating factors and barriers during the application process means that not all CBT therapists become accredited

An internet survey of psychiatrists who have a particular interest in cognitive behavioural therapy: what is the place for the cognitive behavioural model in their role as a psychiatrist?

A survey of psychiatrists with a special interest in CBT was conducted by email correspondence to answer two main questions: ‘What are the uses and the usefulness of the cognitive behavioural model within the day-to-day practice of psychiatrists?’ and ‘What are the most important roles of the consultant medical psychotherapist who has specialized in CBT?’ Despite the constraints of a low response rate the results still reflected the views of 46 psychiatrists who were particularly experienced in the area of CBT. They reported that the cognitive behavioural model was useful in general psychiatric settings, in particular in the engagement of patients, improving client's insight, adherence to medications, and for trainee supervision. The responders reaffirmed previously held views about the role of the consultant medical psychotherapist (CBT), in particular the roles of the assessment and management of complex cases, of taking responsibility for patients with a combination of medical and psychological issues and of teaching CBT to psychiatrists and other mental health professionals. The challenges of translating CBT competencies into generic non-CBT psychiatric settings are discussed, with the important potential role of the medical psychotherapist in this respect. The key skill of formulating cases in secondary care is emphasized

Alternative psychotherapies: Conceptual elucidation and epidemiological framework

This article elucidates and defines alternative psychotherapies, as well as describes the variables that explain why some professional psychologists are prone to endorse these practices. First, the novel concept of “complementary and alternative psychotherapies” (CAP) is defined within the framework of the established hierarchy of clinical evidence. Second, we report a literature review to aid understanding of the main variables explaining why some clinicians prefer CAP. We review rejection of scientific reasoning, misconceptions about human nature, and pragmatic limitations of evidence-based practice