Foreman D M
Department of Psychiatry, School of Postgraduate Medicine and Biological Sciences, University of Keele.
J Med Ethics. 1990 Dec;16(4):200-5. doi: 10.1136/jme.16.4.200.
The purpose of this paper is to establish ethical guidelines for the use of paradoxical interventions in psychotherapy. These are defined as interventions which are counterintuitive, coercive, and which require non-observance by the client. Arguments are developed to show that such interventions are associated with a psychology that understands individuals solely in terms of their relationship: a 'strong interactionist' position. Ethical principles consistent with such a position are considered, and from these it is derived that: paradox is an ethical technique with resistive patients; it requires consent; its content should be consistent with general ethical principles, especially those of beneficence and non-maleficence; non-paradoxical techniques should be preferred when possible; and it should not be used as an assessment procedure. It is concluded that research is needed to explore the effect of such ethical guidelines of effectiveness, though preliminary impressions are encouraging.
本文旨在为心理治疗中使用矛盾干预建立伦理准则。这些干预被定义为违反直觉、具有强制性且要求来访者不遵守的干预措施。文中提出的论点表明,此类干预与一种仅从个体关系角度理解个体的心理学相关联:即“强互动主义”立场。文中考虑了与这一立场相符的伦理原则,并由此得出:对于有抵触情绪的患者,矛盾干预是一种符合伦理的技术;它需要获得同意;其内容应与一般伦理原则相一致,尤其是行善和不伤害原则;应尽可能优先选择非矛盾技术;且它不应被用作一种评估程序。得出的结论是,尽管初步印象令人鼓舞,但仍需要开展研究以探究此类伦理准则对有效性的影响。