So I’m looking through my feeds today… reading the headlines, scouring the net, searching for something interesting.
The iPad is coming to stores soon… possibly.
Google mobile services have been partially blocked in China.
Nothing catching my eye just yet…
An iPhone for Verizon may debut before year end.
Microsoft has patched a number of vulnerabilities in Internet Explorer.
Hold on.
As I mindlessly scroll through Google Reader, a Washington Post article by Dana Scarton jumped out at me and caught my eye: Google and Facebook raise new issues for therapists and their clients. My mind wakes. It cranks into gear. The article makes me think. It makes me wonder. Scarton lays down a number of interesting thoughts to ponder over.
Is it ethical for a therapist to fish out a patient’s blog, Facebook, website or other readily available information on the Internet? Would that be a breach of privacy? Or a means to better understand a patient? I mean, after all, you are paying a therapist to get to know you — in a way. And the internet is publicly accessible…
Scarton describes a case where a patient overdosed on sedatives. The patient’s psychiatrist, Damir Huremovic, was forwarded a suicidal email containing links to a website and blog the patient wrote. What’s a concerned doctor to do? Well, in this case, Huremovic decided that it was okay to click on the links. Scarton writes, “after all, the Web site was in the public domain and it might contain some potentially important information for treatment.”
What do SND readers think? Scarton’s Washington Post article knocked out some great points to both sides. And goes on to take into account, what if the roles were reversed?
In a detour from our typical light-hearted overtone at SND (and killing the buzz a little — anyone watch that Community episode last week?)… I asked the opinions of a few staffers here at SoftwareMedia.com what they thought about the issue.
From the lot of people I quickly polled, we seemed to be fairly split. About half the surveyed staffers didn’t have a problem being searched online, the other half had concerns. Almost everyone agreed it wasn’t straight out black and white though. From my “discovery,” here are a few highlighted quotes:
Ashley — “I think it’s fine. I mean, you’re going to the therapist to basically divulge your whole life anyway. If you really want help, you should be willing to let them know everything about you. On the other hand, the therapist needs to maybe not take EVERYTHING from the internet as truth. I feel like anything done on the internet is an extreme of yourself.”
Brandon — “(I’m) all for it. If someone has published something online, then it is available for anyone who wishes to view it. Thus if someone has something published about them without their permission they need to seek out the source and have them remove the information. Because the internet is such an open and public place, people need to be very careful about what they post. Social networking sites are a huge source of this private information made public. And many people don’t realize just how public their information is when they publish it. But the onus is on the publisher, not the reader.”
Emily — “I think there is a lot wrong with that but honestly it’s probably a good tactic.”
Allison – “At first it seems invasive but if you are turly trying to understand & help this individual I do not see any harm in it. Besides prospective employers are now doing (it), landlords. People need to watch what they share (online).”
Dave — “Well, I’m torn. On one hand, the information is out there in the public domain. On the other hand, I think it’s somewhat inappropriate (and) the information could likely be untrue.”
Okay, okay. So I’ll be fair and also throw in my two cents. I have to agree. The Internet is public domain. When I asked Kevin for his opinion he told me he had no problems with it. “My name is generic and people can never find me anyways,” he told me. Well, “Lansia” isn’t exactly a common name. An Italian car, perhaps… but I’ve never met another with my name. Hence, the slight caution I always consider when publishing personal information to the world wide web. I know that what’s published may be searched by millions (billions?) of Internet users.
With the Internet bringing the world smaller, information may not be retrieved and gathered on a completely whole new level. Just the other day, I used it to my advantage by comparing prices at the local retail store to their online competitors. There’s been no doubt about it; I’ve definitely saved a bit on my minor shopping addiction since the birth of Internet. My friend recently switched physicians with the help of the Internet. And employers and jobseekers, alike, have used the Internet to gain an upper hand. What does this potential employee portray himself? Facebook could tell. The web is a fountain of information, although sometimes dangerous. What’s true? What’s false? And what’s going too far?
Perhaps, my opinion of it all.. it’s okay for therapists to search patient information online. A random person can conduct that same search, why can’t someone that you are paying do so as well? However! It should all be taken in with a grain of salt. Someone online may not be the same person in life – literally and figuratively.
I also believe disclosure should also be important. Keely Kolmes, a psychologist who also writes on Internet ethics, says, “A lot of patients really want to think about you as existing in just that one space (while at therapy), and suddenly they’re seeing you on Twitter and blogging.” That certainly changes the way a patient may want to be perceived by his therapist. Awkward? It may be a side that the patient does not want the therapist taking into account.
Clearly, there’s much more to be debated. As Stephen Behnke, ethics director at the American Psychological Association, points out, “To write rules that allow our field to grow and develop and yet prevent (patient) harm at the same time: That’s the challenge.”
All right. Buzz kill over! Hey, lookit that… these peeps sure are ready for Easter this weekend.
7 comments
Michael Green says:
March 30, 2010 at 5:16 pm (UTC -7 )
I think it should be fine – basically, by putting anything up on the internet, you’re saying it’s OK for ANYBODY to look it over. Obviously, there are more privatized sites, but I didn’t pick up from the article above that those sites were in question.
Another question to ask – what other types of ‘public records’ exist that can or cannot be accessed by psychiatrists and other medical experts?
Lansia says:
March 31, 2010 at 9:56 am (UTC -7 )
That’s a good point, Michael. I would assume the article means easily accessible sites — Facebook, MySpace, blogs, etc. Then, maybe any other sites a patient may have authored. Of course, many social networking sites are controlled through privacy settings, so that brings up the question… Is it ethical for therapists to join these networks and befriend a patient? I think it’s a very jumbled matter that will take time and experience to navigate. And even then, things may not be so clear…
In regards to the public records question… If they are “public” records, wouldn’t be accessible by all? Any examples of what may or may not be accessed?
Thanks for the comment! YES: Reader interaction — love it.
Heather says:
March 31, 2010 at 10:51 am (UTC -7 )
Wow, this comment really does bring up another question: When first posed, “Is it ethical for a therapist to fish out a patient’s blog, Facebook, website or other readily available information on the Internet?” that seems to be, as you said, not so black and white. Sometimes it’s ok, some reasons justify it… But, to say “Is it ok for your therapist to friend you?” That’s where I have to say it’s a pretty clear black & white answer: No! That’s not ok! And why would a therapist want to do that anyway – so that s/he could log some Facebook hours as billable time? I mean, seriously. That’s the line, I think.
Lansia says:
March 31, 2010 at 10:59 am (UTC -7 )
Heather — I may agree with you, but I still feel there are shades of gray. What if the tables were turned and the patient befriended the therapist? And what happens after the fact, after the therapy. Say, a patient and therapist hit it off and decided to remain friends. Is it okay to remain friends and thus, Facebook friends?
In past posts, I’ve mentioned I am a huge Facebook-er, often using it to network. Perhaps a therapist, after the fact, may fall into that category… Just rambling, though. I’m not sure I’ve committed to this take just yet.
Heather says:
March 31, 2010 at 11:08 am (UTC -7 )
Well, professionals of this sort spend a lot of time being wary of “entering into dual relationships” with patients. IE, spending time with them in any capacity other than treatment. Not that it doesn’t happen, but it’s definitely something therapists are already wary of – or should be, ethically speaking. Therefore, with the new connotations to the word “friend” that have come along with social media sites, I feel that therapists should be even more aware of that kind of relationship – and treat this “new” sort of friendship just as they did before Facebook was around.
At least, that’s my opinion. Whereas seeking out public info (which people should also be more aware of what parts of their lives they make public, for these very reasons) might be justified in some cases, becoming members of a “private” group online with someone you have a professional relationship with is crossing into more dangerous territory.
Lansia says:
March 31, 2010 at 11:15 am (UTC -7 )
Hm. Good points. I’m not going to argue otherwise, as this is about as philosophical as I get… Ha.
I think this is an issue where it may come down to the very specific details of the relationship and how the two in the relationship perceive each other. I’ll get back to you after the fact, when my therapy is complete. Whoops. I meant, *if* I ever come to a situation similar… Of course…
Sheri says:
July 3, 2010 at 10:13 am (UTC -7 )
I think these issues need to be left with therapist and client to discuss in a respectful way and make meaning of the dilema within a particular therapeutic dyad. Some therapists communicate with clients via email – some won’t even go there. Depending on the therapists orientation and beliefs about what constitutes good therapy, what impinges on the therapy, they can come to an agreement. Also privacy setting exist on facebook etc and therapists and clients can choose how much they share and make meaning of that in therapy. People are not black and white, so this issue is as diverse as the people who share it. My clients have attempted to add me on facebook, we have a conversation about their add request, i do not add them, however that is my choice and we make meaning together with clients what it means to them and how they feel when i wont add them, all is explored, feelings, fantasies, hopes, expectations – rich material for therapy