The development of dual relationships: Power and professional responsibility

Rinella, Vincent J.; Gerstein, Alvin I.

doi:10.1016/0160-2527(94)90027-2

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The problematic treater/expert relationship differs from the dual relationships commonly proscribed in ethics codes of professional organizations (17) in that it represents a conflict between two professional roles rather than between a professional and a nonprofessional one. This particular role conflict is addressed most directly by the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law in its Ethical Guidelines for the Practice of Forensic Psychiatry:…”

Section: Ethics Codesmentioning

confidence: 97%

On wearing two hats: role conflict in serving as both psychotherapist and expert witness

Strasburger

Gutheil²,

Brodsky³

1997

AJP

199

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Ethics Codesmentioning

confidence: 97%

On wearing two hats: role conflict in serving as both psychotherapist and expert witness

Strasburger

Gutheil²,

Brodsky³

1997

AJP

199

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The relationship between the forensic psychiatrist and the patient is particularly vulnerable because of this ''two hats'' problem, in which the distinction between therapeutic authority, and coercion on behalf of others can get increasingly blurred. 21 If the basic medicomoral objective for doctors is to benefit patients with least harm, then, arguably, forensic psychiatry must sometimes part company from medicine, as the forensic medicomoral objective is said to be, primarily, the protection (benefit) of the public by controlling patient behaviour. If this seems unlikely, it may be thought provoking to consider the words of an English Home Office Minister to a forensic psychiatrist: ''Don't expect the public to pay your salary if you don't protect the public''.…”

Section: Conflicts Of Interest and Ethical Principles: To Whom Is Thementioning

confidence: 99%

Ethical dilemmas in forensic psychiatry: two illustrative cases

Sen

Gordon²,

Adshead³

et al. 2007

J Med Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One approach to the analysis of ethical dilemmas in medical practice uses the "four principles plus scope" approach. These principles are: respect for autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice, along with concern for their scope of application. However, conflicts between the different principles are commonplace in psychiatric practice, especially in forensic psychiatry, where duties to patients often conflict with duties to third parties such as the public. This article seeks to highlight some of the specific ethical dilemmas encountered in forensic psychiatry: the excessive use of segregation for the protection of others, the ethics of using mechanical restraint when clinically beneficial and the use of physical treatment without consent. We argue that justice, as a principle, should be paramount in forensic psychiatry, and that there is a need for a more specific code of ethics to cover specialised areas of medicine like forensic psychiatry. This code should specify that in cases of conflict between different principles, justice should gain precedence over the other principles.

show abstract

“…According to Rinella and Gerstein (1994), allegations of ethical misconduct based in dual relationships are becoming increasingly common. Younggren and Skorka (1992) define dual relationships as "any relationship that runs concurrently with the therapeutic relationship" (p. 32), giving examples as friends, lovers, and business associates.…”

Section: Multiple and Dual Relationshipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the provision in the NASW Code of Ethics with regard to dual relationships, there is very little in the professional literature to guide social work practitioners in more specific terms (Ramsdell & Ramsdell, 1993;Rinella & Gerstein, 1994). Thompson (1990), for example, asserts that dual relationships introduce competing interests and pose a "major threat" to the therapeutic process, that "friendships, for example, are reciprocal and, thus, would require the focus of therapy to shift from one party to the other, from one set of interests to the other, and back again" (p. 56).…”

Section: Multiple and Dual Relationshipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Work Practice Behaviors and Beliefs: Rural-Urban Differences?

Croxton¹,

Jayaratne²,

Mattison³

2002

ASW

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is continuing debate within the social work profession on whether there are significant differences in the practice behaviors and beliefs between rural and urban clinical social workers and whether different standards should be applied in defining ethical practices. This study measures those differences with regard to five practice behaviors: bartering, maintaining confidentiality, competent practice, dual relationships, and social relationships. Differences were found in beliefs regarding the appropriateness of professional behavior though such differences did not translate into practice behaviors. More significantly, the research suggests considerable confusion about the meanings of ethical standards and the utilization of intervention techniques without formal training across both urban and rural social workers.

show abstract

The development of dual relationships: Power and professional responsibility

Cited by 13 publications

References 6 publications

On wearing two hats: role conflict in serving as both psychotherapist and expert witness

On wearing two hats: role conflict in serving as both psychotherapist and expert witness

Ethical dilemmas in forensic psychiatry: two illustrative cases

Social Work Practice Behaviors and Beliefs: Rural-Urban Differences?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About