Lynn University, Boca Raton, FL 33431, USA.
Sex Abuse. 2011 Sep;23(3):346-64. doi: 10.1177/1079063210382048. Epub 2010 Oct 11.
This article addresses ethical questions and issues related to the treatment of sex offenders in denial, using the empirical research literature and the ethical codes of American Psychological Association (APA) and National Association of Social Workers (NASW) to guide the ethical decision-making process. The empirical literature does not provide an unequivocal link between denial and recidivism, though some studies suggest that decreased denial and increased accountability appear to be associated with greater therapeutic engagement and reduced recidivism for some offenders. The ethical codes of APA and NASW value the client's self-determination and autonomy, and psychologists and social workers have a duty to empower individual well-being while doing no harm to clients or others. Clinicians should view denial not as a categorical construct but as a continuum of distorted cognitions requiring clinical attention. Denial might also be considered as a responsivity factor that can interfere with treatment progress. Offering a reasonable time period for therapeutic engagement might provide a better alternative than automatically refusing treatment to categorical deniers.
本文探讨了与否认性犯罪者治疗相关的伦理问题和议题,以实证研究文献以及美国心理协会(APA)和全国社会工作者协会(NASW)的伦理准则为指导,进行伦理决策。实证文献并未提供否认与累犯之间明确的联系,尽管一些研究表明,否认程度降低和责任意识增强似乎与一些罪犯的治疗参与度提高和累犯率降低有关。APA 和 NASW 的伦理准则重视客户的自我决定和自主权,心理学家和社会工作者有责任在不伤害客户或他人的情况下增强个人福祉。临床医生不应将否认视为一个绝对的概念,而应将其视为需要临床关注的认知扭曲连续体。否认也可以被视为一种反应性因素,可能会干扰治疗进展。为治疗参与提供合理的时间期限可能比自动拒绝治疗否认者提供更好的选择。