Abortion 'does not raise' mental health risk

By Jane Dreaper, 
Health correspondent, BBC News

Abortion does not raise the risk of a woman suffering mental health problems, a major review by experts concludes.

Data from 44 studies showed women with an unwanted pregnancy have a higher incidence of mental health problems in general.

This is not affected by whether or not they have an abortion or give birth.

But anti-abortion campaigners said the review sought to "minimise" the psychological effect of terminating a pregnancy.

Experts from the National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health (NCCMH) used the same research methods they use to assess evidence on other mental health issues for NICE.

The work - funded by the Department of Health - came after concerns that abortion may adversely affect a woman's mental health.

Usually, a woman's risk of suffering common disorders such as anxiety or depression would be around 11-12%.

But the researchers said this rate was around three times higher in women with unwanted pregnancies.

'Equal risks'

The director of NCCMH, Prof Tim Kendall, said: "It could be that these women have a mental health problem before the pregnancy.

Whether these women have abortions or give birth, their risk of mental health problems will not increase”

"On the other hand, it could be the unwanted pregnancy that's causing the problem.

"Or both explanations could be true. We can't be absolutely sure from the studies whether that's the case - but common sense would say it's quite likely to be both.

"The evidence shows though that whether these women have abortions - or go on to give birth - their risk of having mental health problems will not increase.

"They carry roughly equal risks.

"We believe this is the most comprehensive and detailed review of the mental health outcomes of abortion to date worldwide."

The whole story is here.

Board suspends license of accused prison psychologist

By Cathy Locke
clocke@sacbee.com The Sacramento Bee

The California Board of Psychology announced that it has suspended the license of Laurie Ann Martinez, a psychologist employed by the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation who is accused of falsely telling police that she was sexually assaulted.

The entire story is here.

California Prison Psychologist Charged With Faking Rape

The Associated Press
Originally Published December 9, 2011

Laurie Ann Martinez

She split her own lip with a pin, scraped her knuckles with sandpaper and had her friend punch her in the face. Investigators say she even ripped open her blouse, then wet her pants to give the appearance she had been knocked unconscious.

But it was all part of what authorities said Friday was an elaborate hoax by the woman to convince her husband she was raped so they could move to a safer neighborhood.

Charges filed by the Sacramento County district attorney allege Laurie Ann Martinez, a prison psychologist, conspired with the friend to create the appearance that she was beaten, robbed and raped by a stranger in April in her Sacramento home.

Martinez, her friend and two co-workers eventually told police the whole thing was a setup to convince Martinez's husband that they needed to move from a blighted, high-crime area three miles north of the state Capitol.

It didn't work. Instead, the couple filed for divorce six weeks after the April 10 incident, according to court records.

"If all you wanted to do is move, there's other ways than staging a burglary and rape," said Sacramento police Sgt. Andrew Pettit. "She went to great lengths to make this appear real."

Martinez, 36, a psychologist for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, reported she had come home that day to find a stranger in her kitchen, authorities said.

"As she tried to run away, the suspect grabbed her and hit her in the face," court records say in describing what she told police. "She lost consciousness and then when she awoke she found her pants and underwear pulled down to her ankles."

Missing from her home were two laptop computers, Martinez's purse, an Xbox video game console, a camera and numerous credit cards that Martinez said the stranger had stolen.

In reality, the items were all at the home of her friend, Nicole April Snyder, authorities allege. Investigators say Martinez had Snyder punch her in the face with boxing gloves they bought for that purpose.

The entire story is here.

The Psychology of Moral Reasoning

Moral Reasoning

This article is found in the public domain here.

Breach concerns rise for health care firms

By Judy Greenwald

Business Insurance

Originally published on November 27, 2011

Hospitals increasingly need a new kind of specialist on call: data security experts.

Health care institutions are particularly vulnerable to data breaches because of factors that include stringent federal and state regulations, widespread dissemination of patient data and a growing black market for patient medical information.

At CNA Financial Corp., for instance, health care represents about 25% of the data breach insurance business written but 60% of all claims, said Mark Silvestri, Quincy, Mass.-based vp of product development and director of CNA's NetProtect.

There are steps health care firms can take to minimize breach risks (see related story on best practices).

Despite the data security challenges they face, health care institutions generally perform well, experts say.

“By and large, I think they do a good job, some better than others,” said Nicholas Economidis, an underwriter of professional liability and specialty lines at Beazley Group P.L.C. in Philadelphia. However, information that “exists in multiple forms throughout an organization,” as it does in health care institutions, is a “very difficult exposure to control,” he said.

The dispersal of that data is an issue as well. While banks tend to keep information internally, health care data is handled by many more organizations, said Tom Srail, Cleveland-based senior vp with Willis North America Inc. “The nature of the health care business requires the sharing of that same information,” he said (see related story on third-party providers).

Patrick Moylan, New York-based senior associate with Dubraski & Associates Insurance Services L.L.C., said health care institutions are increasing their Internet activity with partners that include physicians, health plans and pharmacies.

Having “more people in the line of that chain that have the potential to handle sensitive data simply increases the risk that data will be accessed by accident, or by a third party,” with the potential that it could be used fraudulently, he said.

The sheer breadth of personal information that health care institutions hold complicates the issue.

The entire story is here.

APA/ASPPB/APAIT Joint Task Force - Telepsychology- Summary Statement 2

Telepsych_TF_2

See No Evil: When We Overlook Other People‘s Unethical Behavior

See No Evil

This paper is part of the public domain and can be found here.

Judgment before principle

Engagement of the frontoparietal control network in condemning harms of omission

By Fiery Cushman, Dylan Murray, Shauna Gordon-McKeon, Sophie Wharton and Joshua D. Greene

Social, Cognitive, and Affective Neuroscience

Correspondence should be addressed to: Fiery_Cushman@brown.edu

Abstract

Ordinary people make moral judgments that are consistent with philosophical and legal principles. Do those judgments derive from the controlled application of principles, or do the principles derive from automatic judgments? As a case study, we explore the tendency to judge harmful actions morally worse than harmful omissions (the ‘omission effect’) using fMRI. Because ordinary people readily and spontaneously articulate this moral distinction it has been suggested that principled reasoning may drive subsequent judgments. If so, people who exhibit the largest omission effect should exhibit the greatest activation in regions associated with controlled cognition. Yet, we observed the opposite relationship: activation in the frontoparietal control network was associated with condemning harmful omissions—that is, with overriding the omission effect. These data suggest that the omission effect arises automatically, without the application of controlled cognition. However, controlled cognition is apparently used to overcome automatic judgment processes in order to condemn harmful omissions.

Dilemma 8: A Session with the Spouse

Dr. Faye Miller receives a referral for a 35-year-old female, Betty Drapier, who is both feeling depressed and experiencing marital problems.  During the first few sessions, Mrs. Drapier indicates that her husband, Don, is depressed and in treatment.  Part of her struggle is that she sees her husband as more depressed now than when he started treatment.  By Mrs. Drapier’s report, he appears more stressed because of his job and drinking alcohol more frequently.  She reports that his treating psychologist, Dr. Cooper, is working with her husband and has allegedly advised him to discontinue his medication in favor of an herbal remedy (St. John’s Wort).  Dr. Miller suggests that she meet with both Mr. and Mrs. Drapier to evaluate the marital situation.

At that time, Dr. Miller not only wanted to evaluate the marriage, but to evaluate how impaired the husband was, and Mrs. Drapier’s ability to assess her husband and the marriage accurately.

During the next session, Mr. and Mrs. Drapier arrive separately, but on time.  Mr. Drapier acknowledges many cognitive, behavioral, and physical symptoms of serious depression.  Mr. Drapier smelled as if he had been drinking.  Mr. Drapier also admits that his alcohol use has increased.  He also divulged that his risk-taking behavior has increased as well, such as speeding. During the session, Mr. Drapier verbalized suicidal ideation in a flip manner (“Sometimes I think it would be better if I just killed myself”).  The marital situation appears deteriorated and Mr. Drapier appears significantly depressed. 

As the session winds down, Mr. Drapier spontaneously asks for a second opinion about his treatment with Dr. Cooper.  He indicated that Dr. Cooper recommended that he discontinue a psychotropic medication in favor of an herbal remedy.  Mr. Drapier mentions that Dr. Cooper sells St. John’s Wort to him directly.

After reiterating the purpose of the session (which was to assess the marital situation and not to assess his current treatment), Dr. Miller states that she feels uncomfortable with the request, although she is concerned about the psychologist’s reported behavior. She is also concerned about Mr. Drapier’s level of depression, alcohol use, and suicidal statement.

Abruptly, Mr. Drapier looks at his watch and leaves the office explaining that he is late for a business meeting.

What are Dr. Miller's potential ethical issues in this situation?

What are some actions that you, as the treating psychologist, may have done differently?

If you were Dr. Miller, what are your emotional reactions to this situation?

What obligations does the psychologist have to Mr. Drapier, Mrs. Drapier, Dr. Cooper, and the public?