精神科医生对涉及灵性与宗教的专业界限的态度：混合方法研究。
Psychiatrists' attitudes to professional boundaries concerning spirituality and religion: mixed-methods study.
作者信息
Poole Rob, Cook Christopher C H, Song Robert, Robinson Catherine A
机构信息
Bangor University, Bangor, UK.
Durham University, Durham, UK.
出版信息
BJPsych Bull. 2023 Aug 17;48(4):1-5. doi: 10.1192/bjb.2023.66.
AIMS AND METHOD
Calls for the integration of spirituality into psychiatric practice have raised concerns about boundary violations. We sought to develop a method to capture psychiatrists' attitudes to professional boundaries and spirituality, explore consensus and understand what factors are considered. Case vignettes were developed, tested and refined. Three vignettes were presented to 80 mental health professionals (53% said they were psychiatrists; 39% did not identify their professional status). Participants recorded their reactions to the vignettes. Four researchers categorised these as identifying boundary violations or not and analysed the factors considered.
RESULTS
In 90% of cases, at least three of the four researchers agreed on classification (boundary violation; possible boundary violation; no boundary violation). Participants' opinion about boundary violations was heterogeneous. There was consensus that psychiatrists should not proselytise in clinical settings. Reasoning emphasised pragmatic concerns. Few participants mentioned their religious beliefs. Equivocation was common.
CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS
Mental health professionals seem unsure about professional boundaries concerning religion and spirituality in psychiatric practice.
目的与方法
将精神信仰融入精神科实践的呼声引发了对违反边界问题的担忧。我们试图开发一种方法，以了解精神科医生对专业边界和精神信仰的态度，探索共识并了解所考虑的因素。编写、测试并完善了案例 vignettes。向 80 名心理健康专业人员展示了三个 vignettes（53%的人表示他们是精神科医生；39%的人未表明其专业身份）。参与者记录了他们对 vignettes 的反应。四名研究人员将这些反应归类为是否认定存在边界违规行为，并分析了所考虑的因素。
结果
在 90%的案例中，四名研究人员中至少有三人在分类上达成一致（边界违规；可能的边界违规；无边界违规）。参与者对边界违规的看法存在差异。大家一致认为精神科医生不应在临床环境中劝诱他人信教。推理强调实际问题。很少有参与者提及他们的宗教信仰。模棱两可是常见的。
临床意义
心理健康专业人员似乎不确定精神科实践中与宗教和精神信仰相关的专业边界。
Zotero 插件