Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Patient and Caregiver Perspectives on Ethical Issues in Mental Health Care: an Exploratory Study from India

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ethical viewpoints about the correct course of action in a clinical situation can vary across individuals. The views of patients and their caregivers are also important considerations while exploring solutions to ethical dilemmas. This study aimed to ascertain the perspectives of patients and caregivers on ethical issues in mental health care. This vignette-based study included patients with psychiatric disorders and their caregivers. Patients were included if they were in clinical remission determined by psychiatric rating scales. Caregivers were included if they resided with the patient for the last 1 year. Both patients and caregivers were in the adult age group. The vignettes pertained to confidentiality and coercive care and elicited a yes or no type of responses. Ten short vignettes were presented to the patient caregiver dyad. The types of responses and agreement between the patients and their caregivers were assessed. Responses were available from 160 dyads of patients and their caregivers. The mean age of the patients was 35.6 years while that of the caregivers was 40.5 years. A slight majority of the patients and caregivers were males and were educated above high school. There was considerable variation in the views about correct course in a particular clinical situation. The responses from patients and caregivers endorsing disclosure of confidential information or coercive treatment varied from about 50% to more than 90% depending upon the clinical situation. The responses of patients generally had a fair agreement with responses of the caregivers (kappa values largely between 0.21 and 0.40). Viewpoints of patients and their caregivers provide an important stakeholder insight in approach to resolving ethical dilemmas. In the present cultural context, patients and caregivers were amenable to disclosure of confidential information in for a variety of clinical situations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Avasthi, A. (2010). Preserve and strengthen family to promote mental health. Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 52(2), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5545.64582.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bayer, R., & Toomey, K. E. (1992). HIV prevention and the two faces of partner notification. American Journal of Public Health, 82(8), 1158–1164.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, M. H., Rodriguez, M. K. A., Roper, S. O., & Feinauer, L. L. (2010). Infidelity secrets in couple therapy: therapists’ views on the collision of competing ethics around relationship-relevant secrets. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 17(2), 82–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carman, D., & Britten, N. (1995). Confidentiality of medical records: the patient’s perspective. The British Journal of General Practice: The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 45(398), 485–488.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Elder, R., Price, J., & Williams, G. (2003). Differences in ethical attitudes between registered nurses and medical students. Nursing Ethics, 10(2), 149–161.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, A. C. (2001). Health care ethics: cultural relativity of autonomy. Journal of Transcultural Nursing: Official Journal of the Transcultural Nursing Society, 12(4), 326–330.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Garbutt, G., & Davies, P. (2011). Should the practice of medicine be a deontological or utilitarian enterprise? Journal of Medical Ethics, 37(5), 267–270. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2010.036111.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, M. (1960). A rating scale for depression. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 23, 56–62.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, G., Merz, J. F., & Sankar, P. (2005). A qualitative study of women’s views on medical confidentiality. Journal of Medical Ethics, 31(9), 499–504. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2004.010280.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, M. S., & Feinstein, A. R. (1981). Clinical biostatistics: LIV. The biostatistics of concordance. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 29(1), 111–123.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kuo, F. C. (2009). Secrets or no secrets: confidentiality in couple therapy. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 37(5), 351–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makoae, M. G., & Jubber, K. (2008). Confidentiality or continuity? Family caregivers’ experiences with care for HIV/AIDS patients in home-based care in Lesotho. SAHARA J: Journal of Social Aspects of HIV/AIDS Research Alliance, 5(1), 36–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mobeireek, A. F., Al-Kassimi, F., Al-Zahrani, K., Al-Shimemeri, A., Al-Damegh, S., Al-Amoudi, O., et al. (2008). Information disclosure and decision-making: the Middle East versus the Far East and the West. Journal of Medical Ethics, 34(4), 225–229. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2006.019638.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Oberle, K., & Hughes, D. (2001). Doctors’ and nurses’ perceptions of ethical problems in end-of-life decisions. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 33(6), 707–715.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Overall, J. E., & Gorham, D. R. (1962). The brief psychiatric rating scale. Psychological Reports, 10(3), 799–812.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Cárceles, M. D., Pereñiguez, J. E., Osuna, E., & Luna, A. (2005). Balancing confidentiality and the information provided to families of patients in primary care. Journal of Medical Ethics, 31(9), 531–535. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2004.010157.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Prinsen, E. J. D., & Van Delden, J. J. M. (2009). Can we justify eliminating coercive measures in psychiatry? Journal of Medical Ethics, 35(1), 69–73.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rahman, N. (1996). Caregivers’ sensitivity to conflict: The use of the vignette methodology. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 8(1), 35–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simone, S. J., & Fulero, S. M. (2001). Psychologists’ perceptions of their duty to protect uninformed sex partners of HIV-positive clients. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 19(3), 423–436.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sjöstrand, M., & Helgesson, G. (2008). Coercive treatment and autonomy in psychiatry. Bioethics, 22(2), 113–120.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka, G., Inadomi, H., Kikuchi, Y., & Ohta, Y. (2005). Evaluating community attitudes to people with schizophrenia and mental disorders using a case vignette method. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 59(1), 96–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Willison, D. J., Emerson, C., Szala-Meneok, K. V., Gibson, E., Schwartz, L., Weisbaum, K. M., et al. (2008). Access to medical records for research purposes: varying perceptions across research ethics boards. Journal of Medical Ethics, 34(4), 308–314. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2006.020032.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Young, R. C., Biggs, J. T., Ziegler, V. E., & Meyer, D. A. (1978). A rating scale for mania: reliability, validity and sensitivity. The British Journal of Psychiatry: the Journal of Mental Science, 133, 429–435.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychiatry and National Drug Dependence Treatment Centre (NDDTC), All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, 110029, India

    Siddharth Sarkar, Bichitra Nanda Patra, Vaibhav Patil, Snehil Gupta, Sridhar Mallanik & Abhinav Pandey

Authors
  1. Siddharth Sarkar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bichitra Nanda Patra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vaibhav Patil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Snehil Gupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sridhar Mallanik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Abhinav Pandey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Siddharth Sarkar.

Ethics declarations

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000 (5). Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(PDF 222 kb).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sarkar, S., Patra, B.N., Patil, V. et al. Patient and Caregiver Perspectives on Ethical Issues in Mental Health Care: an Exploratory Study from India. Int J Ment Health Addiction 16, 714–721 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-017-9833-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-017-9833-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation