Maintenance of Confidentiality in Professional Psychology Practice

agree or disagree with below post add insight
While it is crucial that a psychologist must not disclose sensitive information about their client(s), there are some instances in which it is necessary to protect other individuals. Section 4.05 b) explicitly addresses when a breach of confidentiality is needed, and this is often the issue where there is danger present, even if the law does not permit so (American Psychological Association, 2017). The specific case that prompted this method of think was briefly covered in our lecture, and that is the Tarasoff case. There is moral value in maintaining confidentiality, but there is also the ethical side of things where the possibility of death looms over the head of a psychologist. In violent individuals, it becomes essential to act accordingly to protect a third party, which includes warning said third party, alerting the authorities, and at times, warning the client against executing their planned action (Kagle & Kopels, 1994). Another exemplar that involves breaching confidentiality is in case of neglect or other forms of abuse (physical, sexual, emotional). Without intending to violate a patient's dignity, a psychologist can involve authority, but with the purpose of maintaining as much anonymity about the parties involved as possible (Ewuoso, 2021).
Potential repercussions of seeking legal action, and failing to report or verify the truth of any danger, can result in monetary consequences. In some cases, however, the reporter is granted immunity. Additionally, any trust that a psychologist had with a client can diminish greatly, sometimes resulting in the dissolution of a professional relationship (Soble, n.d.). These factors may make mandated reporting more difficult, as some professionals may not wish to face these unwanted consequences. Whenever there is a true danger to someone's well-being, however, legal actions must be taken to protect them.