Patient confidentiality, the  duty to protect, and psychotherapeutic care: perspectives from the philosophy of ubuntu

AbstractThis paper demonstrates howubuntu relational philosophy may be used to ground beneficial coercive care without necessarily violating a patient ’s dignity. Specifically, it argues thatubuntu philosophy is a useful theory for developing necessary conditions for determining a patient ’s potential dangerousness; setting reasonable limits to the duty to protect; balancing the long-term good of providing unimpeded therapy for patients who need it with the short-term good of protecting at-risk parties; and advancing a framework for future case law and appropriate regulations in th e care of psychotherapy patients. Issues regarding the decision to breach medical confidentiality in psychotherapeutic care are ultimately reserved for the courts. Professional assessment might be an important first step in this process, and court rulings govern most aspects of this assessment. Howe ver, current case law, especially in the United States, places an unreasonable expectation on psychotherapists to protect all at-risk parties or foresee that a patient intends to follow through on said threats. It has largely failed to guarantee psychotherapy patients unlimited access to care, whil e potentially inhibiting future honest communication between patients and health professionals and endangering the safety of others. Of these decisions, the two most prominent are the 1976 Tarasoff decision and the 2016 Volk decision. This paper argues for the possibility of grounding good laws inubuntu...
Source: Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics - Category: Medical Ethics Source Type: research