Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-99c86f546-45s75 Total loading time: 0.378 Render date: 2021-11-27T15:30:08.227Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Concerns over professional boundaries remain unresolved

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Columns
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2010

The Executive Committee of the Spirituality and Psychiatry Special Interest Group (SPSIG) of the Royal College of Psychiatrists has made a rather late response Reference Dein, Cook, Powell and Eagger1 to Harold Koenig's editorial Reference Koenig2 published in this journal in 2008. We were co-signatories to a letter Reference Poole, Higgo, Strong, Kennedy, Ruben and Barnes3 that was highly critical of some of Koenig's proposals. These were that a spiritual history should be taken from all patients, even where the patient is resistant to this; that patients' healthy spiritual or religious beliefs should be supported and unhealthy beliefs should be challenged; and that under some circumstances it is appropriate to pray with patients. Although we fully accept that it is sometimes appropriate to explore spiritual or religious issues with patients, we remain seriously concerned that these more controversial practices breach fundamental professional boundaries. Furthermore, the College appears to be lending tacit support for them. Reference Hollins4

Although our letter Reference Poole, Higgo, Strong, Kennedy, Ruben and Barnes3 has been referenced in a number of publications by members of the SPSIG Executive Committee (e.g. their recent book), Reference Cook, Powell and Sims5 our concerns over boundary violations remain unanswered. Indeed, Larry Culliford Reference Culliford6 has rather exacerbated our concerns by suggesting that boundary breaches might a good thing; that this might have spiritual benefits for clinicians; and that boundaries are in any case illusory.

The General Medical Council position on these matters is clear. Their supplementary guidance on personal beliefs 7 states:

You should not normally discuss your personal beliefs with patients unless those beliefs are directly relevant to the patient's care. You must not impose your beliefs on patients, or cause distress by the inappropriate or insensitive expression of religious, political or other beliefs or views. Equally, you must not put pressure on patients to discuss or justify their beliefs (or the absence of them).

In our opinion, it is obvious that Koenig's contentious recommendations are not compatible with this guidance. Although Dein et al Reference Dein, Cook, Powell and Eagger1 acknowledge the risk of boundary breaches, and advocate extreme caution in praying with patients, they do not reject the practice. Indeed, it is implicitly left to the individual clinician to decide whether to pray or not.

We can think of no example of a permissible practice in one-to-one clinical interviewing that is acknowledged to be hazardous to patients to this extent. We cannot understand why SPSIG does not simply state that prayer with patients in clinical settings is unacceptable. We feel that it would be helpful if they explained.

References

1 Dein, S, Cook, CHC, Powell, A, Eagger, S. Religion, spirituality and mental health. Psychiatrist 2010; 34: 63–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2 Koenig, HG. Religion and mental health: what should psychiatrists do? Psychiatr Bull 2008; 32: 201–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3 Poole, R, Higgo, R, Strong, G, Kennedy, G, Ruben, S, Barnes, R, et al. Religion, psychiatry and professional boundaries. Psychiatr Bull 2008; 32: 356–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4 Hollins, S. Understanding religious beliefs is our business. Invited commentary on … Religion and mental health. Psychiatr Bull 2008; 32: 204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5 Cook, C, Powell, A, Sims, A (eds). Spirituality and Psychiatry. RCPsych Publications, 2009.Google Scholar
6 Culliford, L. Psychiatrists and the role of religion in mental health. Psychiatr Bull 2008; 32: 395–6. doi: 10.1192/pb.32.10.395cGoogle Scholar
7 General Medical Council. Personal Beliefs and Medical Practice – Guidance for Doctors. GMC, 2008.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.
You have Access
Open access
4
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Concerns over professional boundaries remain unresolved
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Concerns over professional boundaries remain unresolved
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Concerns over professional boundaries remain unresolved
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *