Search

Primary care settings are particularly prone to complex relationships that can be ethically challenging. This is due in part to three of the distinctive attributes of primary care: a whole family orientation; team-based care; and a longitudinal care delivery model. In addition, the high patient volume of primary care means that the likelihood of encountering ethically challenging relationships is probably greater than in a specialty setting. This article argues that one ethical standard of the American Psychological Association (APA, 2010, Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct, www.apa.org/ethics/code) (10.02, Therapy Involving Couples or Families) should be revised to better accommodate the work of psychologists in primary care. The corresponding Principles of Medical Ethics from the American Medical Association (AMA, 2012, Code of medical ethics: Current opinions with annotations, 2012-2013, Washington, DC: Author), most notably the principle regarding a physician's duty to "respect the rights of patients, colleagues, and other health professionals as well as safeguard privacy" are also noted. In addition, the article details how the three attributes of primary care often result in complex relationships, and provides suggestions for handling such relationships ethically., ((PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).)

An integrated and collaborative team provides the best clinical care of patients and families during end-of-life moments. Behavioral Health Clinicians (BHCs) bring a skill set for facilitating team interactions, attending to group process, as well as making space for the patient or family voice in the care, often with more time available for these roles. Through a case scenario, this article explores the relevant existing codes of ethics and professional conduct for professionals practicing in integrated care settings as they pertain to end-of-life transitions and care. Most notably, potential ethical issues pertaining to patient autonomy, scope of practice, confidentiality, multiple relationships, and record keeping all come to play during end-of-life care when practicing in an integrated primary care setting. Gaps in the existing codes are discussed and recommendations for providing ethically informed patient- and family-centered end-of-life care are suggested., ((PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).)

This special issue discusses the ethical issues providers face in collaborative primary care settings. It is organized in three sections: (a) Common Themes, (b) Context-Specific Quandaries, and (c) Research and Training. It provides case examples to illustrate ethical dilemmas, describe professional ethical standards pertinent to the case, identifies gaps in available guidance and how guidelines might be elucidated in state statues (without going into detail about specific states), offers feasible recommendations to BHCs for deciding an ethical course when extant guidance was lacking, and then demonstrates and applies the recommendations to achieve an ethical resolution to the case example., ((PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).)

Health care in the United States is advancing toward increasingly integrated primary care systems. With this evolution comes a responsibility for providers to carefully consider a variety of issues related to ethical conduct. While working within the same teams on behalf of the same patients and families, professionals representing different disciplines are guided by different sets of baseline ethics guidelines and codes-and the overlap and differences between these principles can easily translate into ethical breaches. Using a clinical vignette as the basis for our discussion, we address issues of informed consent, confidentiality, and grievance procedures specifically. We review extant literature and formal ethics codes upheld by nine leading professional organizations across these foci, offer recommendations about how to manage this clinical scenario, and highlight what is needed to advance our understanding of integration ethics., ((PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).)

Comments on the articles by Goodie, Kanzler, Hunter, Glotfelter, & Bodart, (see record 2013-11498-012), and Reitz, Simmons, Runyan, Hodgson, & Carter-Henry(see record 2013-11498-013), regarding the topic of research and trainng for the special issue on ethical quandaries when delivering integrated primary care. The current author provides brief reflections on each article., ((PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).)

Ethical codes and guidelines for mental health professionals focus on traditional avenues of practice, leaving considerable gaps for clinicians in unique settings, such as behavioral health providers in integrated primary care. In this article, an ethical scenario is presented, where a behavioral health provider is faced with a colleague physician seeking assistance for emotional distress. The scenario highlights important ethical questions about multiple relationships/conflict of interest, impaired colleagues, informed consent, and confidentiality. We review gaps in ethical guidance pertinent to the scenario and provide an eight-step rubric for ethical clinical decision making in integrated primary care., ((PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).)

Integrated primary care research in the Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) presents unique challenges not found in other behavioral health or medical care settings. The PCMH service delivery principles and supporting systems are designed to maximize quality and outcomes of care while controlling health care costs. Conducting ethical research in this setting requires following processes and procedures established by federal statutes that threaten to disrupt this delicate balance. In addition, clinical researchers must consider the ethical requirements and guidance from their respective professional organizations to ensure they adhere to guidelines for conducting ethical research and practice. Given the setting, there is a high likelihood researchers from various disciplines who may adhere to different ethical standards will be collaborating. We present a case example of an ethical concern to illustrate the tension between research and clinical care, discuss federal and professional research guidelines, and propose recommendations for balancing ethical and effective research and clinical care in integrated primary care research in the PCMH., ((PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).)

The rapid expansion of integrated behavioral health care in primary care medical settings introduces a number of ethical challenges faced by teams of health professionals from different disciplines. As military health care settings have increasingly implemented primary care behavioral health models of service delivery, distinct ethical dilemmas have emerged. This article examines two of these ethical issues, competence and multiple relationships, through presentation of clinical scenarios in military integrated primary care settings. Relevant professional ethical guidelines for psychologists, social workers, and physicians are examined. Recommendations for the ethical practice of primary care behavioral health, as well as suggestions for future development of professional ethical guidelines, are discussed., ((PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).)

Comments on the articles by Robinson & Rickard, (see record 2013-11498-007), Dobmeyer, (see record 2013-11498-008), Mullin & Stenger (see record 2013-11498-009), and Rosenberg & Speice (see record 2013-11498-010) regarding the topic of context-specific quandaries for the special issue on ethical quandaries when delivering integrated primary care. The current author provides brief reflections on each article., ((PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).)

Comments on the articles by Hudgins, Rose, Fifield, & Arnault, (see record 2013-11498-002), Reiter & Runyan, (see record 2013-11498-003), Hodgson, Mendenhall, & Lamson (see record 2013-11498-004), and Kanzler, Goodie, Hunter, Glotfelter, & Bodart (see record 2013-11498-005), regarding the topic of common themes for the special issue on ethical quandaries when delivering integrated primary care. The current author provides brief reflections on each article., ((PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).)