父权主义和自主性:心理治疗师在困境中的选择及其作为治疗关系伦理方面的正当性

IF 0.3 Q4 PSYCHIATRY
Anna Bogatyńska-Kucharska, Jarosław Kucharski, M. Jabłoński
{"title":"父权主义和自主性:心理治疗师在困境中的选择及其作为治疗关系伦理方面的正当性","authors":"Anna Bogatyńska-Kucharska, Jarosław Kucharski, M. Jabłoński","doi":"10.15557/pipk.2023.0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: The aim of the study was to analyse solutions to ethical dilemmas based on the criterion of “paternalism-autonomism” in the context of psychotherapists’ professional experience and therapeutic modality. Another aim was to review the sources of choices of ethical decisions from the perspective of the “intuitiveness – ethical reflection” dichotomy, and to assess the percentage of ethical, ambiguous, and non-ethical justifications of solutions preferred in those ethical dilemmas. Method: It was a cross-sectional qualitative study. An original questionnaire describing three exemplary clinical and ethical dilemmas combined with a multiplechoice questionnaire containing recommended solutions to the presented dilemmas was employed in the study. The responses were correlated with the modality of psychotherapy (cognitive-behavioural, psychoanalytic-psychodynamic, psychodynamic-systemic, systemic, integrated) and the professional experience of therapists. The statistical analysis included questionnaires obtained from 191 respondents. Results: Statistical data indicate the general advantage of autonomous decisions in the entire group of therapists, regardless of their professional experience. A significant advantage of autonomic solutions over paternalistic solutions was demonstrated in all analysed therapeutic approaches with the exception of the cognitive-behavioural approach. Moreover, a statistically significant majority of psychotherapists reported the use of ethical reflection when choosing the solutions to the discussed dilemmas. A comparison of the total number of selected justifications revealed a significant advantage of ethical justifications over ambiguous and non-ethical ones, regardless of the professional experience of therapists and in all modalities except the psychoanalytic-psychodynamic and psychodynamic-systemic types. Conclusions: The principle of respect for autonomy plays an important role in the professional ethics of psychotherapists, and the preference for ethical considerations and justifications when choosing solutions to practical ethical dilemmas indicates a potential benefit of incorporating ethics into the professional training of therapists.","PeriodicalId":42849,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatria i Psychologia Kliniczna-JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY AND CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Paternalism and autonomy: psychotherapists’ choices in dilemmas and their justifications as ethical aspects of the therapeutic relationship\",\"authors\":\"Anna Bogatyńska-Kucharska, Jarosław Kucharski, M. Jabłoński\",\"doi\":\"10.15557/pipk.2023.0001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: The aim of the study was to analyse solutions to ethical dilemmas based on the criterion of “paternalism-autonomism” in the context of psychotherapists’ professional experience and therapeutic modality. Another aim was to review the sources of choices of ethical decisions from the perspective of the “intuitiveness – ethical reflection” dichotomy, and to assess the percentage of ethical, ambiguous, and non-ethical justifications of solutions preferred in those ethical dilemmas. Method: It was a cross-sectional qualitative study. An original questionnaire describing three exemplary clinical and ethical dilemmas combined with a multiplechoice questionnaire containing recommended solutions to the presented dilemmas was employed in the study. The responses were correlated with the modality of psychotherapy (cognitive-behavioural, psychoanalytic-psychodynamic, psychodynamic-systemic, systemic, integrated) and the professional experience of therapists. The statistical analysis included questionnaires obtained from 191 respondents. Results: Statistical data indicate the general advantage of autonomous decisions in the entire group of therapists, regardless of their professional experience. A significant advantage of autonomic solutions over paternalistic solutions was demonstrated in all analysed therapeutic approaches with the exception of the cognitive-behavioural approach. Moreover, a statistically significant majority of psychotherapists reported the use of ethical reflection when choosing the solutions to the discussed dilemmas. A comparison of the total number of selected justifications revealed a significant advantage of ethical justifications over ambiguous and non-ethical ones, regardless of the professional experience of therapists and in all modalities except the psychoanalytic-psychodynamic and psychodynamic-systemic types. Conclusions: The principle of respect for autonomy plays an important role in the professional ethics of psychotherapists, and the preference for ethical considerations and justifications when choosing solutions to practical ethical dilemmas indicates a potential benefit of incorporating ethics into the professional training of therapists.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42849,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychiatria i Psychologia Kliniczna-JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY AND CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychiatria i Psychologia Kliniczna-JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY AND CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15557/pipk.2023.0001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatria i Psychologia Kliniczna-JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY AND CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15557/pipk.2023.0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是在心理治疗师的专业经验和治疗方式的背景下,分析基于“家长式自主主义”标准的伦理困境的解决方案。另一个目的是从“直觉-伦理反思”二分法的角度审查伦理决策的选择来源,并评估在这些伦理困境中首选的解决方案的伦理、模糊和非伦理理由的百分比。方法:采用横断面定性研究。本研究采用了一份描述三种典型临床和伦理困境的原始问卷,以及一份包含所提出困境的推荐解决方案的多项选择问卷。这些反应与心理治疗的模式(认知行为、精神分析心理动力学、心理动力学系统、系统、综合)和治疗师的专业经验相关。统计分析包括191名受访者的问卷调查。结果:统计数据表明,在整个治疗师群体中,无论他们的专业经验如何,自主决策都具有普遍优势。除了认知-行为方法外,所有分析的治疗方法都证明了自主解决方案相对于家长式解决方案的显著优势。此外,统计上显著的大多数心理治疗师报告说,在选择所讨论的困境的解决方案时,使用了道德反思。对所选理由总数的比较表明,无论治疗师的专业经验如何,在除精神分析心理动力和心理动力系统类型外的所有模式下,道德理由都比模棱两可和不道德的理由具有显著优势。结论:尊重自主原则在心理治疗师的职业道德中发挥着重要作用,在选择实际道德困境的解决方案时,优先考虑道德因素和理由,这表明将道德纳入治疗师的职业培训具有潜在的好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Paternalism and autonomy: psychotherapists’ choices in dilemmas and their justifications as ethical aspects of the therapeutic relationship
Aim: The aim of the study was to analyse solutions to ethical dilemmas based on the criterion of “paternalism-autonomism” in the context of psychotherapists’ professional experience and therapeutic modality. Another aim was to review the sources of choices of ethical decisions from the perspective of the “intuitiveness – ethical reflection” dichotomy, and to assess the percentage of ethical, ambiguous, and non-ethical justifications of solutions preferred in those ethical dilemmas. Method: It was a cross-sectional qualitative study. An original questionnaire describing three exemplary clinical and ethical dilemmas combined with a multiplechoice questionnaire containing recommended solutions to the presented dilemmas was employed in the study. The responses were correlated with the modality of psychotherapy (cognitive-behavioural, psychoanalytic-psychodynamic, psychodynamic-systemic, systemic, integrated) and the professional experience of therapists. The statistical analysis included questionnaires obtained from 191 respondents. Results: Statistical data indicate the general advantage of autonomous decisions in the entire group of therapists, regardless of their professional experience. A significant advantage of autonomic solutions over paternalistic solutions was demonstrated in all analysed therapeutic approaches with the exception of the cognitive-behavioural approach. Moreover, a statistically significant majority of psychotherapists reported the use of ethical reflection when choosing the solutions to the discussed dilemmas. A comparison of the total number of selected justifications revealed a significant advantage of ethical justifications over ambiguous and non-ethical ones, regardless of the professional experience of therapists and in all modalities except the psychoanalytic-psychodynamic and psychodynamic-systemic types. Conclusions: The principle of respect for autonomy plays an important role in the professional ethics of psychotherapists, and the preference for ethical considerations and justifications when choosing solutions to practical ethical dilemmas indicates a potential benefit of incorporating ethics into the professional training of therapists.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
25.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: PSYCHIATRIA I PSYCHOLOGIA KLINICZNA is an international peer-reviewed scientific journal publishing original articles that constitute significant contributions to the advancements of psychiatry and psychology. In addition, PSYCHIATRIA I PSYCHOLOGIA KLINICZNA publishes information from the medical associations, reports and materials from international congresses, letters to the Editor, information on new medical products as well as abstracts and discussions on papers published in other scientific journals, reviews of books and other publications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信