How Should Physicians Make Decisions about Mandatory Reporting When a Patient Might Become Violent

Dados Bibliográficos

ID15746554
AutoresAmy Barnhorst (0000-0002-1699-3049, University of California, Davis, autor correspondente), Garen J Wintemute (0000-0001-6748-8512, University of California Davis Medical Center), Marian E Betz (0000-0003-1643-6565, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus)
Ano2018
Volume20
Fascículo1
Páginas29-35
Data de publicação2018-01-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoThe AMA Journal of Ethic (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 2376-6980 • E-ISSN: 2376-6980
EditoraAmerican Medical Association (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1001/journalofethics.2018.20.1.ecas1-1801
PMID29360025
OpenAlexW2782031671
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas2
Referências citadas2

Mandatory reporting of persons believed to be at imminent risk for committing violence or attempting suicide can pose an ethical dilemma for physicians, who might find themselves struggling to balance various conflicting interests. Legal statutes dictate general scenarios that require mandatory reporting to supersede confidentiality requirements, but physicians must use clinical judgment to determine whether and when a particular case meets the requirement. In situations in which it is not clear whether reporting is legally required, the situation should be analyzed for its benefit to the patient and to public safety. Access to firearms can complicate these situations, as firearms are a well-established risk factor for violence and suicide yet also a sensitive topic about which physicians and patients might have strong personal beliefs

Feeling · Child and Adolescent Health · Gun Ownership and Violence Research · Psychology · Social Psychology · Suicide and Self-Harm Studies