Top

Current Psychiatry Reports

Published in:

01-09-2017 | Psychiatry in the Digital Age (J Shore, Section Editor)

Professional Ethics for Digital Age Psychiatry: Boundaries, Privacy, and Communication

Authors: James E. Sabin, Jonathan Clark Harland

Published in: Current Psychiatry Reports | Issue 9/2017

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Internet and social media use continue to expand rapidly. Many patients and psychiatrists are bringing digital technologies into the treatment process, but relatively little attention has been paid to the ethical challenges in doing this. This review presents ethical guidelines for psychiatry in the digital age.

Recent Findings

Surveys demonstrate that patients are eager to make digital technologies part of their treatment. Substantial numbers search for professional and personal information about their therapists. Attitudes among psychiatrists about using digital technologies with patients range from dread to enthusiastic adoption.

Summary

Digital technologies create four major ethical challenges for psychiatry: managing clinical boundaries; maintaining privacy and confidentiality; establishing realistic expectations regarding digital communications; and upholding professional ideals. Traditional ethical expectations are valid for the evolving digital arena, but guidance must be adapted for actual application in practice.

Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Technology Internet/Broadband Fact Sheet. January 12, 2017. Available at http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/internet-broadband/. (Accessed April 2, 2017).

Internet World Stats. Internet usage statistics: the internet big picture. Available at http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm. (Accessed April 2, 2017).

Internet Live Stats. Internet Users. Available at http://www.internetlivestats.com/internet-users/. (Accessed April 2, 2017).

Facebook Investor Relations. Facebook Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2016 Results Available at https://investor.fb.com/investor-news/press-release-details/2017/facebook-Reports-Fourth-Quarter-and-Full-Year-2016-Results/default.aspx. (Accessed April 2, 2017).

• Inkster B, Stillwell D, Kosinski M, Jones B. A decade into Facebook: where is psychiatry in the digital age? Lancet Psychiatry 2016:3:1087-90. This article makes a strong case for why clinicians and researchers should engage with social media.

American Medical Association. Preamble in Code of Medical Ethics. American Medical Association, 2017. (page 1).

•• Gutheil TG, Gabbard GO. The concept of boundaries in clinical practice: theoretical and risk management dimensions. Am J Psychiatry 1993:150:188-96. This is the classical discussion of clinical boundaries.

Talkspace. Available at https://www.talkspace.com/. Accessed June 19, 2017.

Ginroy A, Sabatier LM, Eth S. Addressing therapeutic boundaries in social networking. Psychiatry. 2012;75:40–8.CrossRef

10.

•• Zur, O. (2015). To accept or not to accept? How to respond when clients send “Friend Request” to their psychotherapists or counselors on social networking sites. Available at http://www.zurinstitute.com/socialnetworking.html. (Accessed April 10, 2017) Full of practical information.

11.

Veritilo P, Billick SB. Psychiatric illness and Facebook: a case report. Psychiatr Q. 2012;83:385–9.CrossRef

12.

Gabbard GO, Kassaw KA, Perez-Garcia G. Professional boundaries in the era of the Internet. Acad Psychiatry. 2011;35:168–74.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Petrow S. When psychiatrists are on Facebook, their patients can get a case of TMI. Washington Post August 25, 2014. Available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/when-psychiatrists-are-on-facebook-their-patients-can-get-a-case-of-tmi/2014/08/25/ed31e522-110a-11e4-9285-4243a40ddc97_story.html?utm_term=.e13fcc210f53.,(Accessed April 11, 2017).

14.

Editorial. You have a new friend request. Lancet 2017:389:983.

15.

Tech Insider. Facebook recommended a psychiatrist’s patients friend each other—and there’s no clear explanation. Available at http://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-people-you-may-know-2016-8. Accessed May 24, 2017.

16.

•• Tan SSL, Goonawardene N. Internet health information seeking and the patient-physician relationship: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res 2017; 19(1):e9. [URL: http://www.jmir.org/2017/1/e9/] [doi: 10.2196/jmir:5729] [PMID: 28104579] This literature review of 18 empirical studies (from 2000 to 2015) found that Internet health information seeking can improve the patient-physician relationship, especially when using a collaborative, transparent approach.

17.

•• Eichenberg C, Sawyer A. Do patients look up their therapists online? An exploratory study among patients in psychotherapy. J Med Internet Res Mental Health 2016; 3(2):e22. This Internet-based survey explored the frequency and primary reasons why patients had obtained online information about their therapists.

18.

Gorrindo T, Brendel D. Introduction: avatars, cybercoaches, and search engines: internet technology’s value in modern psychiatry. Harv Rev Psychiatry. 2010;18:77–9.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Clinton BK, Silverman BC, Brendel DH. Patient-targeted googling: the ethics of searching online for patient information. Harv Rev Psychiatry. 2010;18:103–12.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Lancet Psychiatry. Back of the net. Lancet Psychiatry 2016;3:907. Retrieved 4/15/2017 from http://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/ethics.

21.

Sabin JE, Skimming K. A framework of ethics for telepsychiatry practice. International Review of Psychiatry. doi:10.3109/09540261.2015.1094034.

22.

•• American Psychiatric Association. (2016). Opinion A.1.h. in Opinions of the Ethics Committee on the principles of medical ethics: with annotations especially applicable to psychiatry: 2017 Edition. Retrieved 4/15/2017 from http://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/ethics. This opinion of the APA Ethics Committee directly addresses the question on whether it is ethical for a psychiatrist to Google a patient, and under what conditions might it be appropriate.

23.

Lewkowicz K. Surprise! Millenials love email just as much as everybody else. Litmus, April 27, 2016. Available at https://litmus.com/blog/surprise-millennials-love-email-just-as-much-as-everybody-else. (Accessed April 14, 2017).

24.

Haun JN, Patel NR, Lind JD, Antinori N. Large-scale survey findings inform patients’ experiences in using secure messaging to engage in patient-provider communication and self-care management: a quantitative assessment. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17(12):e282.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Moldawsky RJ, Shah PV. E-mails in a psychiatric practice: why patients send them and how psychiatrists respond. Permanente J. 2016;20(1):65–9.

26.

American Medical Association. Opinion 2.3.1. in Code of medical ethics. American Medical Association, 2017. (pages 41–42).

27.

•• Zur O. I love these emails, or do I? The use of emails in psychotherapy and counseling. 2015. Available at: http://www.zurinstitute.com/email_in_therapy.html (Accessed April 24, 2017) Full of practical information.

28.

CMS. Eligible professional Medicaid incentive program: modified stage 2—objectives and measures for 2017 (Objective 9 of 10). Available at https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Legislation/EHRIncentivePrograms/Downloads/MedicaidEPStage2_Obj9.pdf (Accessed April 14, 2017).

29.

Suler J. The online disinhibition effect. CyberPsychology & Behavior. 2004;7(3):321–6.CrossRef

30.

Kitsis EA, Milan FB, Cohen HW, Myers D, et al. Who’s misbehaving? Perceptions of unprofessional social media use by medical students and faculty. BMC Medical Education Published online 2016 Feb 18;16:67. doi: 10.1186/s12909-016-0572-x.

31.

Dawkins R, King WD, Boateng B, Nichols M, et al. Pediatric residents’ perceptions of potential professionalism violations on social media: a US national survey. JMIR Med Educ 2017;3(1):e2.

32.

Robotham D, Satkunanathan S, Doughty L, Wykes T. Do we still have a digital divide in mental health? A five-year survey follow-up. J Med Internet Res 2016 Nov; 18(11): e309. Published online 2016 Nov 22. doi: 10.2196/jmir.6511.

Title: Professional Ethics for Digital Age Psychiatry: Boundaries, Privacy, and Communication
Authors: James E. Sabin
Jonathan Clark Harland
Publication date: 01-09-2017
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Current Psychiatry Reports / Issue 9/2017
Print ISSN: 1523-3812
Electronic ISSN: 1535-1645
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-017-0815-5

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Professional Ethics for Digital Age Psychiatry: Boundaries, Privacy, and Communication

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Recent Findings

Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Recent Findings

Summary

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 9/2017

Psychosocial Issues in Patients with Head and Neck Cancer: an Updated Review with a Focus on Clinical Interventions

Dementia Caregiver Burden: a Research Update and Critical Analysis

Neurocognitive Treatments for Eating Disorders and Obesity

A Skill Set for Supporting Displaced Children in Psychological Recovery After Disasters

Gaze-Based Assessments of Vigilance and Avoidance in Social Anxiety: a Review

Genetics of Schizophrenia: Ready to Translate?