Patients with severe mental illness and the ethical challenges related to confidentiality during family involvement: a scoping review

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.Background: Despite evidence on the significant potential value of family involvement during the treatment of patients with severe mental illness, research has shown that family involvement is largely underused. The duty of confidentiality is reported to be a key barrier to family involvement. To develop more insight into this barrier, this scoping review focuses on the following question: What are the reported ethical challenges related to confidentiality when involving family in the treatment of patients with severe mental illness? Methods: A systematic search into primary studies was conducted using the following databases: Medline (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), and Web of Science core collection (Clarivate). The PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) scheme and qualitative content analysis were used to make the ethical challenges more explicit. Results: Twelve studies—both qualitative and quantitative—were included. We identified the following main categories of ethical challenges: (1) the best interest of family members vs. confidentiality, (2) the patient’s best interest vs. the right to confidentiality, (3) patient trust and alliance as a reason not to involve the relatives or not to share information, and (4) using confidentiality as a smokescreen. We also identified several subcategories and illustrative and concrete examples of ethical challenges. Conclusions: Through a systematic examination, we discovered various types of ethical challenges related to confidentiality when involving the family in the treatment of patients with severe mental illness. However, research on these ethical challenges and the constituents of these challenges remains limited and often implicit. An ethical analysis will create knowledge which may facilitate a more balanced and nuanced approach to respecting the principle of confidentiality while also considering other moral principles. The duty of confidentiality does not always have to be a major barrier to family involvement; this insight and using this ethical analysis in the training of healthcare professionals may benefit the patient, the family, and the services.publishedVersio

The significance of ethics reflection groups in mental health care: a focus group study among health care professionals

Background: Professionals within the mental health services face many ethical dilemmas and challenging situations regarding the use of coercion. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the significance of participating in systematic ethics reflection groups focusing on ethical challenges related to coercion. Methods: In 2013 and 2014, 20 focus group interviews with 127 participants were conducted. The interviews were tape recorded and transcribed verbatim. The analysis is inspired by the concept of ‘bricolage’ which means our approach was inductive. Results: Most participants report positive experiences with participating in ethics reflection groups: A systematic and well-structured approach to discuss ethical challenges, increased consciousness of formal and informal coercion, a possibility to challenge problematic concepts, attitudes and practices, improved professional competence and confidence, greater trust within the team, more constructive disagreement and room for internal critique, less judgmental reactions and more reasoned approaches, and identification of potential for improvement and alternative courses of action. On several wards, the participation of psychiatrists and psychologists in the reflection groups was missing. The impact of the perceived lack of safety in reflection groups should not be underestimated. Sometimes the method for ethics reflection was utilised in a rigid way. Direct involvement of patients and family was missing. Conclusion: This focus group study indicates the potential of ethics reflection groups to create a moral space in the workplace that promotes critical, reflective and collaborative moral deliberations. Future research, with other designs and methodologies, is needed to further investigate the impact of ethics reflection groups on improving health care practices.publishedVersio

Ethical challenges in connection with the use of coercion: a focus group study of health care personnel in mental health care

Background: In recent years, the attention on the use of coercion in mental health care has increased. The use of coercion is common and controversial, and involves many complex ethical challenges. The research question in this study was: What kind of ethical challenges related to the use of coercion do health care practitioners face in their daily clinical work? Methods: We conducted seven focus group interviews in three mental health care institutions involving 65 multidisciplinary participants from different clinical fields. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. We analysed the material applying a ‘bricolage’ approach. Basic ethical principles for research ethics were followed. We received permission from the hospitals’ administrations and all health care professionals who participated in the focus group interviews. Results: Health care practitioners describe ethical dilemmas they face concerning formal, informal and perceived coercion. They provide a complex picture. They have to handle various ethical challenges, not seldom concerning questions of life and death. In every situation, the dignity of the patient is at stake when coercion is considered as morally right, as well as when coercion is not the preferred intervention. The work of the mental health professional is a complicated “moral enterprise”. The ethical challenges deserve to be identified and handled in a systematic way. This is important for developing the quality of health care, and it is relevant to the current focus on reducing the use of coercion and increasing patient participation. Precise knowledge about ethical challenges is necessary for those who want to develop ethics support in mental health care. Better communication skills among health care professionals and improved therapeutic relationships seem to be vital. Conclusions: A systematic focus on ethical challenges when dealing with coercion is an important step forward in order to improve health care in the mental health field

Developing Organizational Diversity Statements Through Dialogical Clinical Ethics Support: The Role of the Clinical Ethicist

In pluralist societies, stakeholders in healthcare may have different experiences of and moral perspectives on health, well-being, and good care. Increasing cultural, religious, sexual, and gender diversity among both patients and healthcare professionals requires healthcare organizations to address these differences. Addressing diversity, however, comes with inherent moral challenges; for example, regarding how to deal with healthcare disparities between minoritized and majoritized patients or how to accommodate different healthcare needs and values. Diversity statements are an important strategy for healthcare organizations to define their normative ideas with respect to diversity and to establish a point of departure for concrete diversity approaches. We argue that healthcare organizations ought to develop diversity statements in a participatory and inclusive way in order to promote social justice. Furthermore, we maintain that clinical ethicists can support healthcare organizations in developing diversity statements in a more participatory way by fostering reflective dialogues through clinical ethics support. We will use a case example from our own practice to explore what such a developmental process may look like. We will critically reflect on the procedural strengths and challenges as well as on the role of the clinical ethicist in this example

The relevance of Foucauldian art-of-living for ethics education in a military context: Theory and practice

How can ethical decision-making in organizations be further reinforced? This article explores the relevance of Michel Foucault’s ideas on art-of-living for ethics education in organizations. First, we present a theoretical analysis of art-of-living in the work of Foucault as well as in the work of two philosophers who greatly influenced his work, Friedrich Nietzsche and Pierre Hadot. Next, we illustrate how art-of-living can be applied in ethics education. In order to examine some of the benefits and challenges of applying the art-of-living in the practice of ethics education, we discuss an example of how the art-of-living concept has been used in a train-the-trainer course on military ethics. We suggest that Foucauldian art-of-living may foster awareness of power dynamics which are in play when military personnel face moral dilemmas

Moral case deliberation

Ethical dilemmas in general are characterised by a choice between two mutually excluding options neither of which is satisfactory, because there always will be a form of moral damage. Within the context of medicine several ethics support services have been developed to support healthcare professionals in dealing with ethical dilemmas, including moral case deliberation. In this article, we describe how moral case deliberation works in daily practice, illustrated with a case example from the neurology ward. The article is meant as an introduction to moral case deliberation according to the dilemma method. We show its relevance to the clinic and the context needed to put it into practice

Moral Challenges in Transgender Care: A Thematic Analysis Based on a Focused Ethnography

Treatment teams providing transgender-affirming medical care are inherently faced with various kinds of moral and ethical dilemmas and questions, which are becoming even more pressing due to increasing treatment numbers and public attention for transgender care. Little is known about what kinds of moral and ethical challenges manifest in clinical practice. The aim of the present research was to map the moral and ethical challenges of healthcare professionals working in a specialized multidisciplinary transgender care center. Over a period of 7 months, during a focused ethnographic study, data were collected through participant observation of multidisciplinary team meetings, observation of individual psychodiagnostic assessment sessions with clients, and analysis of transcripts and reports of a series of moral case deliberations. A thematic content analysis of the data identified various implicit and explicit moral and ethical challenges around the following six themes: (1) assessing eligibility; (2) content of treatment; (3) sequential order of the treatment steps; (4) role of the clinical guidelines; (5) differing notions regarding gender identity, and (6) decision-making process. Our research provides a detailed insight into the way healthcare professionals experience these moral and ethical challenges and how they are related to (local) guidelines, the multidisciplinary character of GD care, and its inherent implicit and explicit gender norms. Our findings suggest that good transgender care may profit from continuous multidisciplinary deliberation of and sensitivity toward the normative dimension of transgender care. The paper ends with recommendations for ethics support mechanisms in transgender care

Concordance among patients and physicians about their ideal of autonomy impacts the patient-doctor relationship: A cross-sectional study of Mexican patients with rheumatic diseases

Introduction In patient-doctor interaction both parties play a role. Primary objective was to determine if the concordance among rheumatologists and their patients of their ideal of autonomy was associated with a better patient-doctor relationship. Secondary objective was to describe factors associated to a patient paternalistic ideal of autonomy (PPIA). Materials and methods This cross-sectional study had 3 steps. Step-1 consisted in translation/cultural local adaption of Ideal Patient Autonomy Scale (IPAS), a 14-items Dutch questionnaire. Step-2 consisted of IPAS validity and reliability in 201 outpatients. Step-3 consisted of the application of IPAS and the patient-doctor relationship questionnaire (PDRQ) to 601 outpatients with a medical encounter, and of IPAS to the 21 attending rheumatologists. Each patient-physician encounter was classified into with/without concordance in the ideal of autonomy and PRDQ scores were compared (Man Whitney U test). Regression analysis was used for associations. Results Step-1 followed ISPOR task force recommendations. Patients from Step-2 and Step-3 were representative outpatients with rheumatic diseases. IPAS structure underwent a modification; the 14 items were redistributed into four subscales, further combined into PPIA vs. patient-centered autonomy ideal. IPAS was valid and reliable. There were 497 patients with a preferred ideal of autonomy, primarily (84.9%) PPIA. There were 363 patient-doctor encounters with concordance in the autonomy ideal and their PDRQ-9 scores were higher. Religious beliefs and higher PDRQ-9 item 8 score (“I feel pleased with my doctor´s treatment”) were associated to a PPIA. Conclusions Concordance of autonomy ideal among patients and their rheumatologists positively impacts on the patient-doctor relationship

Important outcomes of moral case deliberation: A Euro-MCD field survey of healthcare professionals' priorities

Background There is a lack of empirical research regarding the outcomes of such clinical ethics support methods as moral case deliberation (MCD). Empirical research in how healthcare professionals perceive potential outcomes is needed in order to evaluate the value and effectiveness of ethics support; and help to design future outcomes research. The aim was to use the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcome Instrument (Euro-MCD) instrument to examine the importance of various MCD outcomes, according to healthcare professionals, prior to participation. Methods A North European field survey among healthcare professionals drawn from 73 workplaces in a variety of healthcare settings in the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden. The Euro-MCD instrument was used. Results All outcomes regarding the domains of moral reflexivity, moral attitude, emotional support, collaboration, impact at organisational level and concrete results, were perceived as very or quite important by 76%–97% of the 703 respondents. Outcomes regarding collaboration and concrete results were perceived as most important. Outcomes assessed as least important were mostly about moral attitude. ‘Better interactions with patient/family’ emerged as a new domain from the qualitative analysis. Dutch respondents perceived most of the outcomes as significantly less important than the Scandinavians, especially regarding emotional support. Furthermore, men, those who were younger, and physician-respondents scored most of the outcomes as statistically significantly less important compared with the other respondents. Conclusions The findings indicate a need for a broad instrument such as the Euro-MCD. Outcomes related to better interactions between professionals and patients must also be included in the future. The empirical findings raise the normative question of whether outcomes that were perceived as less important, such as moral reflexivity and moral attitude outcomes, should still be included. In the future, a combination of empirical findings (practice) and normative reflection (theories) will contribute to the revision of the instrument

The impact of individualized evidence-based decision support on aneurysm patients' decision making, ideals of autonomy, and quality of life

Background. A major challenge in surgery is the integration of evidence-based medicine and patient autonomy. The authors present a randomized trial studying the effect of an individualized evidence-based brochure (IB) on patients' autonomous behavior, patients' ideals of autonomy, and quality of life. Method. Patients with an asymptomatic abdominal aneurysm and their surgeon were randomized to receive a general brochure (GB) or an IB presenting survival information and a ranking of the treatment strategies. Before and after receiving the brochure, patients filled out questionnaires on their behavior during the consultation, ideals of patient autonomy, and quality of life. Surgeons answered a short checklist evaluating the consultation. Results. One hundred patients participated, 49 in the intervention, 51 in the control group. The IB group had a better understanding of important issues in the treatment decision, had prepared more questions, and was less satisfied with the duration of the consultation. Their impression that the surgeon perceived them more as a medical problem than a patient with a problem increased. They agreed less with the surgeon's advice and lost some of their belief in ''the doctor knows best.'' Beforehand, the IB group had a stronger preference for patient-based decisions, but afterward they displayed more surgeon-based decisions. No effects were seen on patients' quality of life. Conclusions. Individualized evidence-based information stimulated patients' active involvement but in the context of our study led to less patient-based decisions. Patient-made decisions and patient autonomy should, however, not be equated