Facebook: A Threat to Relationships?

Facebook may be a threat to new relationships

While there are many things we might desire in a relationship – such as healthy communication, empathy, mutual respect and understanding, encouragement and support – excessive Facebook use is probably not one of them.

And in fact, for new couples, it can be predictive of conflict.

Surveying Facebook users ages 18 to 82 years old, researchers asked them to describe how often they used Facebook and how much, if any, conflict arose between their current or former partners as a result of Facebook use.

The results were convincing. Facebook use among couples significantly predicted Facebook-related conflict, and significantly predicted negative relationship outcomes such as cheating, breakup, and divorce (Clayton et al., 2016).

Clayton explains, “Previous research has shown that the more a person in a romantic relationship uses Facebook, the more likely they are to monitor their partner’s Facebook activity more stringently, which can lead to feelings of jealousy. Facebook-induced jealousy may lead to arguments concerning past partners. Also, our study found that excessive Facebook users are more likely to connect or reconnect with other Facebook users, including previous partners, which may lead to emotional and physical cheating” (Clayton, 2016, paragraph 4).

And this trend was particularly apparent in newer relationships. “These findings held only for couples who had been in relationships of three years or less,” notes Clayton (Clayton, 2016, paragraph 5). On the other hand, for participants who have been in relationships for longer than three years Facebook use did not appear to be related to conflict or predictive or breakups or divorce (Clayton et al., 2016).

“Facebook may be a threat to relationships that are not fully matured” (Clayton, 2016, paragraph 6).

While Facebook is a wonderful way to connect, it might not be the best thing for our new relationships. A better option, notes Clayton, is that we learn about our partners by spending time engaged with one other, communicating, and enjoying activities together – all while curtailing our Facebook use.

Related Online Continuing Education (CE) Courses:

Finding Happiness: Positive Interventions in TherapyFinding Happiness: Positive Interventions in Therapy is a 4-hour online continuing education (CE) course that explores the concept of happiness, from common myths to the overriding factors that directly increase our feelings of contentment.

We will start with a discussion on why you, the clinician, need to know about happiness and how this information can help in your work with clients. We will then uncover mistakes we make when trying to attain happiness and look carefully at the actions we take and the beliefs that do not just obfuscate our happiness efforts, but often leave us less happy. Next, we will explore the ways in which our mindset influences our feelings of happiness and the many ways we can fundamentally change our levels of well-being, not just immediately, but for many years to come. The final section of this course contains exercises you can use with clients to cultivate and sustain a lifelong habit of happiness. Course #40-45 | 2018 | 57 pages | 25 posttest questions

Ethics and Social MediaEthics and Social Media is a 2-hour online continuing education (CE) course that examines the use of Social Networking Services (SNS) on both our personal and professional lives. Is it useful or appropriate (or ethical or therapeutic) for a therapist and a client to share the kinds of information that are routinely posted on SNS like Facebook, Twitter, and others? How are psychotherapists to handle “Friending” requests from clients? What are the threats to confidentiality and therapeutic boundaries that are posed by the use of social media sites, texts, or tweets in therapist-client communication?

The purpose of this course is to offer psychotherapists the opportunity to examine their practices in regard to the use of social networking services in their professional relationships and communications. Included are ethics topics such as privacy and confidentiality, boundaries and multiple relationships, competence, the phenomenon of friending, informed consent, and record keeping. A final section offers recommendations and resources for the ethical use of social networking and the development of a practice social media policy. Course #20-75 | 2016 | 32 pages | 15 posttest questions

Codependency: Causes, Consequences and CuresCodependency: Causes, Consequences and Cures is a 3-hour online continuing education (CE) course that offers strategies for therapists to use in working with codependent clients. The author offers in-depth and in-person strategies for therapists to use in working with clients who present with the characteristic behavior patterns of codependency. Clients are usually unaware of the underlying codependency that is often responsible for the symptoms they’re suffering. Starting with emphasis on the delicate process of building a caring therapeutic relationship with these clients, the author guides readers through the early shame-inducing parenting styles that inhibit the development of healthy self-esteem. Through personal stories and case studies, the author goes on to describe healing interventions that can help clients identify dysfunctional patterns in relationships, start leading balanced lives and connecting with others on a new and meaningful level. Evaluative questionnaires, journaling assignments and other exercises are included to help you help your clients to overcome codependency. The rewards of successfully treating codependency are great for client and clinician alike. Even though the propensity for relapse always exists, it’s unlikely that a person who has made significant progress towards overcoming this disease will lose the gains they’ve made. Course #30-83 | 2015 | 40 pages | 21 posttest questions

Professional Development Resources is a nonprofit educational corporation 501(c)(3) organized in 1992. We are approved to sponsor continuing education by the American Psychological Association (APA); the National Board of Certified Counselors (NBCC); the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB); the American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA); the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA); the Commission on Dietetic Registration (CDR); the Alabama State Board of Occupational Therapy; the Florida Boards of Social Work, Mental Health Counseling and Marriage and Family Therapy, Psychology & School Psychology, Dietetics & Nutrition, Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, and Occupational Therapy Practice; the Georgia State Board of Occupational Therapy; the New York State Education Department’s State Board for Mental Health Practitioners as an approved provider of continuing education for licensed mental health counselors (#MHC-0135); the Ohio Counselor, Social Worker & MFT Board and Board of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology; the South Carolina Board of Professional Counselors & MFTs; the Texas Board of Examiners of Marriage & Family Therapists and State Board of Social Worker Examiners; and are CE Broker compliant (all courses are reported within a few days of completion).

Earn CE Wherever YOU Love to Be!

How Should Therapists Handle “Friending” Requests?

Course excerpt from Ethics and Social Media

The Phenomenon of “Friending”

Friending Request from ClientA “friend” used to be an individual of one’s personal acquaintance, with whom a sense of liking, trust, and camaraderie had been built over some period of mutual experience and interaction. Many people considered themselves fortunate if – over the period of a lifetime – they were able to count a handful of others among those they considered to be friends.

With the advent of Facebook, that concept has morphed into something that may or may not bear any resemblance to the original definition. In many cases, people who are friends on Facebook were personal real-life friends before joining up on Facebook. In other cases, new friends are made online, without the benefit (or bother) of any face-to-face interaction. In still other cases, individuals spend a great deal of time and effort collecting “friends” online for the sake of amassing a very large audience for their postings.

In some cases, these numbers are quite extraordinary. According to a survey by the Pew Research Center (2014), the average number of friends a person has on Facebook was 338. A generational ranking revealed – not surprisingly – that number of Facebook friends was inversely correlated with one’s age. Millennials (age 18-29) averaged 300 friends (a quarter of these young users had more than 500 friends in their network), Gen Xers (age 30 – 49) 200, and Younger Boomers (age 50 -64) 75. People over the age of 65 average 30 friends.

To Friend or Not to Friend

One of the more complex challenges facing contemporary therapists (at least those who use Facebook) is the question of how to respond when receiving a friending request from a client. It is the arrival of this simple electronic message that precipitates a cascade of questions concerning a broad spectrum of ethical issues from privacy and confidentiality to multiple relationships and clinical competency. Zur (2012) states it this way:

“Currently, more than 900 million people around the world and more than 157 million in the United States [these numbers are already outdated] have Facebook pages, and at least some of them may be your clients. Clearly, the issue of when, or whether, to use Facebook touches on just about every clinical and ethical issue of importance to therapists, particularly issues relating to boundaries and dual relationships. Should you even have a Facebook page, and if so, how much of your private life should you show? Who should see what? Should you use Facebook’s privacy settings to distinguish what you show among colleagues, best friends, family members, and old, new, and potential clients? How do you respond to clients who want to ‘friend’ you?”

These questions are answered in different ways by different therapists. Kolmes (2009) offers this view:

“Inviting clients to your personal profile can also be perceived as inviting them into your personal life. Unless you utilize very strict privacy settings on your profile, those who become your ‘friends’ can post and view messages posted to your Wall, they can view your photo albums and read the comments on these albums, and they can see and interact with your other ‘friends.’ This can send mixed messages to clients, especially if they are unclear about therapeutic boundaries to begin with. If you would never think of inviting a client to a cocktail party at your home with your friends and family present, then you may want to think twice about inviting them to be your friend on Facebook (or approving their friend requests). It is the online equivalent of inviting them into your social circle.”

Laura Hahn, a counselor in private practice, suggests that therapists refrain from friending clients on Facebook. “Make it a policy by adding a statement to your informed consent documentation and inform your clients up front. Counselors who find clients being overly interested in the counselor’s personal life and conducting intrusive online searches can explore that topic with the client in therapy” (in Shallcross, 2011).

Questions for Psychotherapists to Consider Before Responding to Clients’ Friend Requests

It is useful – probably even necessary – for a therapist to spend some time pondering the friending issue before plunging into the world of digital friendship. On the Zur Institute website (http://www.zurinstitute.com/socialnetworking.html) there is a list of questions for therapists to consider as they face this decision.

Learn more: https://www.pdresources.org/course/index/6/1147/Ethics-and-Social-Media

Ethics and Social MediaEthics and Social Media is a 2-hour online continuing education (CE) course that examines the use of Social Networking Services (SNS) on both our personal and professional lives. Is it useful or appropriate (or ethical or therapeutic) for a therapist and a client to share the kinds of information that are routinely posted on SNS like Facebook, Twitter, and others? How are psychotherapists to handle “Friending” requests from clients? What are the threats to confidentiality and therapeutic boundaries that are posed by the use of social media sites, texts, or tweets in therapist-client communication? The purpose of this course is to offer psychotherapists the opportunity to examine their practices in regard to the use of social networking services in their professional relationships and communications. Included are ethics topics such as privacy and confidentiality, boundaries and multiple relationships, competence, the phenomenon of friending, informed consent, and record keeping. A final section offers recommendations and resources for the ethical use of social networking and the development of a practice social media policy. Course #20-75 | 2016 | 32 pages | 15 posttest questions

Professional Development Resources is approved by the American Psychological Association (APA) to sponsor continuing education for psychologists; the National Board of Certified Counselors (NBCC ACEP #5590); the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB Provider #1046, ACE Program); the American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA Provider #3159); the Commission on Dietetic Registration (CDR Provider #PR001); the Florida Boards of Social Work, Mental Health Counseling and Marriage and Family Therapy (#BAP346), Psychology & School Psychology (#50-1635), Dietetics & Nutrition (#50-1635), and Occupational Therapy Practice (#34); the Ohio Counselor, Social Worker & MFT Board (#RCST100501); the South Carolina Board of Professional Counselors & MFTs (#193); and the Texas Board of Examiners of Marriage & Family Therapists (#114) and State Board of Social Worker Examiners (#5678).

Mental Health Professionals on Facebook

By Steven Petrow | The Washington Post

Mental Health Professionals are on FacebookFor the past two weeks, whenever I’ve scrolled through my Facebook newsfeed I’ve come to the section “People You May Know.” The suggestions offered have included relatives, co-workers, some people I don’t even like in “real” life — and my current psychologist. “OMG!” I’ve winced repeatedly at the profile photo of my shrink, who for the sake of his privacy I’ll just call Dr. E.

Still, being the curious sort, I clicked to view his page, which isn’t very well protected from eyes like mine. For starters, there are 12 photos of him available for all the world to enjoy, several of them shirtless and one that had a “friend” of his posting “Woof!” underneath it. I also discovered pictures of Dr. E from high school with two nice-looking young ladies. Although I’ve known he was gay, I started to wonder: Was he bisexual then? When did he come out? I found myself thinking much more about his personal life than any patient should.

Among Dr. E’s Facebook friends was another psychologist, one who seemed to deploy no privacy safeguards whatsoever. Any patient clicking on his Facebook page could see tons of photos, including those of his wedding and honeymoon, and even his attendance at a celebration of “Bush 43’s” last night in office. (That makes it a good bet he’s a Dem, which might be TMI for a GOP patient.) Feeling nosy, I found yet another shrink on Dr. E’s friend list with equally little privacy protection.

At that point I started wondering: Are there no social media best practices for mental health professionals? To my surprise, I discovered that the answer to this question is no. According to a recent article in Academic Psychiatry, “[T]here are no firm guidelines for psychiatrists regarding how to manage information on the Internet.” The authors also highlighted one of the central problems for mental health professionals using social media: “Facebook users commonly list their sexual orientation, marital status, religion, age, hometown, and political affiliation in their profiles, most of which information is not typically shared with patients.”

Before Facebook and Twitter, psychotherapists had varying boundaries regarding what they disclose to patients. Some revealed nothing at all, while others disclosed personal information they thought might help the therapeutic relationship (for example, that they are married, divorced, Jewish or a recovering alcoholic).

Over the course of my adulthood, I’ve had two previous therapists, both of whom divulged very little about themselves in our sessions. Each of them ended up spilling some rather personal beans to me (one unintentionally, the other out of necessity), but neither of these revelations felt as inappropriate as the Facebook page of Dr. E.

Unlike Dr. E, my first therapist never even told me he was gay — a fact that might have reassured me a good bit, since this was the early 1980s, when I was first coming out. He was a Woody Allen lookalike who, every time I’d ask him a personal question, would turn the query back to me, asking, “Why do you want to know?” Mostly, I was eager to learn whether he had a boyfriend or a girlfriend. One night, long after dark, I was in the West Village in New York when I spotted him leaving a gay bar, dressed in a black leather jacket and cap. Silently, he nodded hello. Well, that answered that question, although we never actually discussed it.

“Dr. Woody” and I had had what therapists call an “extra-therapeutic contact” — it may have been awkward, but it was accidental and he had done nothing wrong. After all, even a therapist is allowed to have a personal life.

A dozen years later, I found myself in a new therapeutic relationship. While deeply empathetic, this psychologist also drew strict boundaries between her professional and personal lives — until the day an armed guard showed up outside the office. She explained that her attorney husband had once successfully prosecuted a man who — after being convicted — came to their home and shot him. Now the felon was being released, with no requirement that he stay away from his old nemesis. Thus the armed guard.

Dr. Woody’s disclosure was accidental but important (to me at least); the second therapist’s was necessary but irrelevant (except in that she and her husband ended up going underground, which ended our successful therapeutic relationship). Dr. E’s personal disclosures on social media seem different to me because he was repeatedly presented to me as a peer and not my therapist. I may have been curious, but I didn’t really want to see everything behind that black curtain. Even though I couldn’t stop myself from looking.

I understand that mental health professionals are only human, and they often make the same digital-era mistakes we all do. Just like the rest of us, they need some rules of the road.

While no firm social media guidelines have been adopted by the various mental health professional organizations, the American Psychological Association has published a manifesto of sorts on the topic. In “The Internet’s Ethical Challenges,” Stephen Behnke, director of the APA’s Ethics Office, wrote that “psychologists have special ethical issues they need to think through to determine how this technology is going to affect their work.”

Eric Harris, who serves on a task force on tele-psychology guidelines for psychologists, says figuring out how to use social media can be challenging for mental health professionals: “It would be wrong to say they can’t participate on social networks, but they have more responsibility to think through how they manage their privacy settings. Your psychologist should have made it hard for you to find him.”

“The patient has some responsibility in this, too,” says Harris, a psychologist and lawyer, noting that he would have put the onus on me had I actively sought out Dr. E. on Facebook, sent him a friend request or used Google to determine his political contributions, the tax-assessed value of his house or his genealogy.

But I didn’t. Facebook suggested Dr. E. as a friend because he probably hadn’t really thought about his privacy settings, which allowed the Web site’s bot to find friends and groups we have in common. He’s far from the exception: A University of Florida study reported that only 37.5 percent of medical students and residents use their privacy settings, which Harris told me is probably a good barometer of the problem in his discipline.

The mental health profession is not unaware of this issue. In 2011, Glen Gabbard, a professor of psychiatry at SUNY Upstate Medical University in Syracuse, N.Y., proposed nine “recommended guidelines for maintaining professional boundaries online.” First on the list: “Psychiatrists and other mental health professionals who use social networking sites should activate all available privacy settings.” Three years later, the guidelines have yet to be formally adopted. More than a decade after Facebook exploded across the globe, that’s an unconscionable lapse that needs to be fixed.

In the meantime, I’m going to ask Dr. E. to change his privacy settings so the nice robots at Facebook can’t make the connection between us — or at least they won’t tell me about it if they do. That way, I can stop thinking about his personal life and get our sessions back to what they should be, which is all about me.

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/when-psychiatrists-are-on-facebook-their-patients-can-get-a-case-of-tmi/2014/08/25/ed31e522-110a-11e4-9285-4243a40ddc97_story.html

Petrow writes the “Civilities” advice column for The Post. He can be reached at www.facebook.com/stevenpetrow and www.twitter.com/stevenpetrow.

What You Can Do to Support World Suicide Prevention Day

From the International Association for Suicide Prevention (IASP)

Become a Facebook Fan of the International Association for Suicide Prevention (IASP) www.facebook.com/IASPinfo

World Suicide Prevention DayWORLD SUICIDE PREVENTION DAY is an opportunity for all sectors of the community – the public, charitable organizations, communities, researchers, clinicians, practitioners, politicians and policy makers, volunteers, those bereaved by suicide, other interested groups and individuals – to join with the International Association for Suicide Prevention and the WHO to focus public attention on the unacceptable burden and costs of suicidal behaviours with diverse activities to promote understanding about suicide and highlight effective prevention activities.

Those activities may call attention to the global burden of suicidal behaviour, and discuss local, regional and national strategies for suicide prevention, highlighting cultural initiatives and emphasizing how specific prevention initiatives are shaped to address local cultural conditions.

Initiatives which actively educate and involve people are likely to be most effective in helping people learn new information about suicide and suicide prevention. Examples of activities which can support World Suicide Prevention Day include:

  • Launching new initiatives, policies and strategies on World Suicide Prevention Day, September 10th.
  • Learning about connectedness, mental health and suicide prevention from materials found in IASP’s Web resource directory http://goo.gl/0ovDtp
  • Using the WSPD Press Preparation Package that offers media guides in the planning of an event or activity.
  • Downloading the World Suicide Prevention Day Toolkit that contains links to World Suicide Prevention Day resources and related Web pages http://goo.gl/TEvYHD
  • Holding conferences, open days, educational seminars or public lectures and panels
  • Writing articles for national, regional and community newspapers, blogs and magazines
  • Holding press conferences
  • Placing information on your website and using the IASP World Suicide Prevention Day Web banner, promoting suicide prevention in one’s native tongue. http://goo.gl/rOijcr
  • Securing interviews and speaking spots on radio and television
  • Organizing memorial services, events, candlelight ceremonies or walks to remember those who have died by suicide
  • Asking national politicians with responsibility for health, public health, mental health or suicide prevention to make relevant announcements, release policies or make supportive statements or press releases on WSPD
  • Holding depression awareness events in public places and offering screening for depression
  • Organizing cultural or spiritual events, fairs or exhibitions
  • Organizing walks to political or public places to highlight suicide prevention
  • Holding book launches, or launches for new booklets, guides or pamphlets
  • Distributing leaflets, posters and other written information
  • Organizing concerts, BBQs, breakfasts, luncheons, contests, fairs in public places
  • Writing editorials for scientific, medical, education, nursing, law and other relevant journals
  • Disseminating research findings
  • Producing press releases for new research papers
  • Holding training courses in suicide and depression awareness
  • Joining us on the official World Suicide Prevention Day Facebook Event Page http://goo.gl/b2Z0rt
  • Supporting suicide prevention 365 days a year by becoming a Facebook Fan of the IASP http://goo.gl/S7zalS
  • Following the IASP on Twitter (www.twitter.com/IASPinfo), tweeting #WSPD or #suicide or #suicideprevention
  • Creating a video about suicide prevention
  • Lighting a candle, near a window at 8 PM in support of: World Suicide Prevention Day, suicide prevention and awareness, survivors of suicide and for the memory of loved lost ones. Find “Light a Candle Near a Window at 8 PM” postcards in various languages at: http://goo.gl/9Ic1en
  • Participating in the World Suicide Prevention Day – Cycle Around the Globe ttp://goo.gl/csdyvG

 

Source: http://www.iasp.info/wspd/

Technology-Crazy: Are We Setting our Kids up for Future Addiction?

By KENS 5’s Deborah Knapp

Technology-crazy: Are we setting our kids up for future addiction?Is the internet making us crazy?

New research finds 61 percent of those surveyed feel addicted to the internet, and 68 percent say they suffer from internet “disconnect anxiety.”

Another study found people check their smartphones 34 times a day. In fact, it had become a compulsion. Whether it’s our smartphones, Facebook, Twitter or video games, every age group is at risk of being unknowingly obsessed with technology.

One expert has said the computer is like electronic cocaine, fueling cycles of mania followed by depression. Mental health and dependency specialist, Dr. Gregory Jantz, suggests a tech-detox day.

Watch the full story: http://www.kens5.com/news/Are-we-setting-our-kids-up-for-future-addiction–162132545.html

Related Online CEU Course:

Ethics and Social MediaEthics and Social Media is a 2-hour online CEU course that offers psychotherapists the opportunity to examine their practices in regard to the use of social networking services in their professional relationships and communications. Is it useful or appropriate (or ethical or therapeutic) for a therapist and a client to share the kinds of information that are routinely posted on Social Networking Services (SNS) like Facebook, Twitter, and others? How are psychotherapists to handle “Friending” requests from clients? What are the threats to confidentiality and therapeutic boundaries that are posed by the use of social media sites, texts, or tweets in therapist-client communication? The purpose of this course is to offer psychotherapists the opportunity to examine their practices in regard to the use of social networking services in their professional relationships and communications. Included are ethics topics such as privacy and confidentiality, boundaries and multiple relationships, competence, the phenomenon of friending, informed consent, and record keeping. A final section offers recommendations and resources for the ethical use of social networking and the development of a practice social media policy.

Professional Development Resources is approved as a provider of continuing education by the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB #1046); the National Board of Certified Counselors (NBCC #5590); the American Psychological Association (APA); the National Association of Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Counselors (NAADAC #000279); the Florida Board of Clinical Social Work, Marriage & Family Therapy, and Mental Health Counseling (#BAP346); the California Board of Behavioral Sciences (#PCE1625); the Texas Board of Examiners of Marriage & Family Therapists (#114); the South Carolina Board of Professional Counselors and Marriage & Family Therapists (#193); and the Ohio Counselor, Social Worker and Marriage & Family Therapist Board (#RCST100501).

Enhanced by Zemanta

Texting or Friending Patients Frowned Upon in New Professional Guidelines

By Robert Preidt

Doctors Urged to Refrain from Social Media Contacts With PatientsIn this age of texting, tweets and Facebook “friends,” doctors should show restraint when it comes to reaching out to patients through social media, new guidelines say.

Updated recommendations for online ethics from the American College of Physicians (ACP) and the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) say the key is drawing a clear line between professional life and social life.

If physicians fail to do so, the “potential dangers are confidentiality concerns, replacement of face-to-face or phone interaction, and ambiguity or misinterpretation of digital interactions,” the American College of Physicians said in a news release.

Some of the key recommendations:

  • Doctors should not contact or “friend” patients through personal social media such as Facebook.
  • Text-messaging should not be used for passing along medical information except when there is patient consent. Even then, doctors should use “extreme caution,” the guidelines said.
  • Careful judgment is needed when a doctor is contacted through email or other electronic communications by someone who is seeking medical advice but has had no previous contact with the doctor. In such situations, it is usually best for the doctor to encourage the person to schedule an office visit, or, in the case of an urgent concern, to go to the nearest emergency department.
  • Doctors should establish an online professional profile so that it appears first during an online search, instead of a review of the doctor from a physician ranking site. This can provide more control, so that the information read by patients is accurate.
  • Medical trainees need to be careful about what they post online, or they could damage their future careers.

“It is important for physicians to be aware of the implications for confidentiality and how the use of online media for non-clinical purposes impacts trust in the medical profession,” Dr. Humayun Chaudhry, president and CEO of the FSMB, said in the news release.

The policy paper appears online and in the April 16 print issue of the journal Annals of Internal Medicine.

SOURCE: American College of Physicians, news release, April 11, 2013

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_135870.html

Related Online CEU Course:

Ethics and Social MediaEthics and Social Media is a 2-hour online continuing education course for psychologists, counselors, social workers, and MFTs. Is it useful or appropriate (or ethical or therapeutic) for a therapist and a client to share the kinds of information that are routinely posted on Social Networking Services (SNS) like Facebook, Twitter, and others? How are psychotherapists to handle “Friending” requests from clients? What are the threats to confidentiality and therapeutic boundaries that are posed by the use of social media sites, texts, or tweets in therapist-client communication? The purpose of this course is to offer psychotherapists the opportunity to examine their practices in regard to the use of social networking services in their professional relationships and communications. Included are ethics topics such as privacy and confidentiality, boundaries and multiple relationships, competence, the phenomenon of friending, informed consent, and record keeping. A final section offers recommendations and resources for the ethical use of social networking and the development of a practice social media policy.

CE Information:

Professional Development Resources is approved as a provider of continuing education by the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB #1046); the National Board of Certified Counselors (NBCC #5590); the American Psychological Association (APA); the National Association of Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Counselors (NAADAC #000279); the Florida Board of Clinical Social Work, Marriage & Family Therapy, and Mental Health Counseling (#BAP346); the California Board of Behavioral Sciences (#PCE1625); the Texas Board of Examiners of Marriage & Family Therapists (#114); the South Carolina Board of Professional Counselors and Marriage & Family Therapists (#193); and the Ohio Counselor, Social Worker and Marriage & Family Therapist Board (#RCST100501).

12 Days of Christmas are Here!

12 Days of Christmas Giveaway

We are thankful for YOU this holiday season! During the 12 Days of Christmas (Dec 14-25), we will give away a FREE course each day to one of our lucky Facebook friends. Be sure to ‘like‘ us for your chance to win!

We will hold the drawing daily and contact winners with details. We will also offer one online course per day at 50% Off regular price! Check your inbox or our Facebook page for the daily deal.

Happy Holidays from your friends @ PDR!

Inside The Digital Lives of Teens

Three facts parents should know about social media natives.

By: Marilyn Price-Mitchell, PhD

Inside The Digital Lives of TeensMost American teenagers have used some form of social media. And 75% maintain an online social profile, mostly through Facebook. A recent research study, Social Media, Social Life: How Teens View Their Digital Lives, provides fascinating insight into the digital habits of today’s 13-17 year-olds and how social media makes them feel about themselves.

When asked how social media affected their emotional well-being, teens overwhelmingly reported positive outcomes. They were far more likely to say they felt more confident, less depressed, more outgoing, more popular, less shy, and more sympathetic to others because of their online interactions. However, for about 5% of young people, the results were more negative.

The majority of teens (52%) say that social media has improved their relationships with friends while only 4% say that friendships have been harmed. Similarly, many more report that social media has helped relationships with family members (37%) rather than hurt them (2%).

From the 40-page study, three findings stood out that will be particularly pertinent to parents of social media natives..

1. Face-to-Face Communication Ranks High

Contrary to fears that digital communications will turn young people into robotic creatures unable to relate intelligently in the real world, most teenagers prefer face-to-face interactions. This finding supports my own research study on civically-engaged youth. While the teens in my study were highly active in the online world, they admitted their greatest learning and enjoyment came from face-to-face relationships.

The reason we observe so many young people texting is because 68% of them do so on a daily basis! Next to face-to-face interactions, texting is king. Why? Teens say It’s quick, easy, and gives them the opportunity to think before responding.

Because they value face-to-face relationships, many agreed that social media takes time away from being with people in-person, which they often perceive as a dilemma.

2. Teens Sometimes Want to Unplug

Like adults, teens often feel the need to unplug from their digital lives. One young person said, “Sometimes it’s nice to just sit back and relax with no way possible to communicate with anyone.”

When asked if they felt “addicted” to their cell phones, 41% answered “Yes.” And they also pointed out that parents were addicted to gadgets too. In fact, many wished parents would spend less time on their devices and felt frustrated when people surfed the internet, checked email, or texted while they are hanging out together.

3. Social Networking Begins Early

Facebook is by far the most favorite social networking experience for teens. Three-quarters of 13 to 14-year-olds frequent social networking sites, and that goes up to 87% by the time they reach 15 to 17 years of age.

While most teens say they understand Facebook privacy policies, many do not. Before your teen posts a profile, this is one of the most important things to help them review and understand. Young people must recognize that their digital profiles will follow them for the rest of their lives.

Among teens with an online social profile, there are three reasons why they enjoy and benefit from social networking. 1) It helps them keep in closer touch with friends, particularly the ones they don’t see regularly, 2) They become more deeply acquainted with students at their own schools, and 3) They are able to connect with people with whom they share common interests.

Should Parents Worry?

Many parents worry that Facebook and other social networking sites will bring emotional harm to their children, either from predators, cyber-bullying, or inconsiderate friends. But the majority of teens don’t believe these sites affect them emotionally, one way or the other.

For young people who do report a change in psychological health, only a small percentage reported a negative change. In fact, emotional well-being was not discernibly different if a teen was a heavy or light social networker.

One troublesome result of this study is how often teens encounter online hate speech. This includes language that is sexist, homophobic, racist, or derogatory in other ways. Forty percent of teens report this to be a common element of online dialogue. It’s a good idea for parents to prepare teens for this and teach them how to respond. Check out the article, Teaching Civility in an F-Word Society, for some guidance.

This study, while limited in scope, can give parents some peace of mind. While cyber-bullying is real and some young people are genuinely harmed by their online relationships, these situations are the exception, not the rule. We should set rules and give children guidelines for online behavior just as we do for behavior in the real world.

The bottom line: Take a deep breath and be grateful for the fact that most teens using social media and digital devices report an overall sense of happiness and confidence. And despite the fact that their lives are intertwined with technology for evermore, they mostly appreciate the face-to-face time they spend with their friends and family. Let’s hope that never changes!

Source: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-moment-youth/201207/inside-the-digital-lives-teens

Careless Use of Facebook Can Jeopardize Your Career

By Frances Patterson, PhD, MAC

Careless Use of Facebook Can Jeopardize Your CareerI often am asked questions regarding the ethical issues for counselors regarding social networking, specifically Facebook. At that point I usually hear about a situation that has caused professional and personal problems for an addictions professional. In each scenario that follows names have been changed and situations modified to protect the identity of those involved.

Situation 1 – Using Social Media to Monitor Clients

Danny is a substance abuse counselor who decided to join Facebook for a specific reason: he wanted to look up clients to see if they were posting information on Facebook that would indicate they were using.

What are the Ethical Concerns?

Client autonomy: Clients in treatment have a right to choose whether to use alcohol or other drugs. As a counselor would you drive by a client’s house to see if that client is sitting on the front porch smoking a joint? Clients have a right to their personal lives outside of treatment, whether or not it is what we would choose for them.

Counseling relationship: Trust is a major component of the counseling relationship. A client could consider it a violation of that trust to “spy” on him on Facebook. Before the advent of Facebook, a counselor asked clients if they were using and conducted drug screens. Should our methods be any different today?

Do no harm: Is there the possibility that such actions could harm a client? We must always consider the possible outcomes of our actions when it involves client care. A client could possibly feel betrayed by her counselor if such “investigation” is pursued by the counselor.

Professional boundaries: One of our responsibilities as counselors is to have healthy professional boundaries. These boundaries can easily become blurred if or when we begin to intrude on the personal lives of clients outside the professional relationship. Just as we need to set appropriate boundaries with clients regarding our personal Facebook pages, we too should respect their boundaries.

Situation 2 – The Personal/Private Divide

Mary Beth was a counselor at a large addictions treatment facility. She is not in recovery from drug or alcohol addiction. She had recently returned from a vacation at the beach. A client of one of Mary Beth’s colleagues at the same facility mentioned during an individual session that he had been searching people on Facebook and found Mary Beth’s page. He stated, “I really liked those pictures of her vacation.” After the client left, his counselor looked up Mary Beth on Facebook to see what the client was referring to. To her dismay she found that Mary Beth had no security on her page and all of her information was open to anyone who came across it. Additionally, she had posted pictures of herself in a bikini, holding a beer in her hand, with a male companion who appeared to be fondling her. Mary Beth was fired from her job. The agency maintained that she was not projecting a professional image and was negatively affecting the reputation of the agency.

What are the Ethical Concerns?

Counseling relationship: What did the pictures portray to clients and colleagues who saw them on her Facebook page? We have a responsibility to safeguard the integrity of our relationship with clients. (NAADAC Code of Ethics, Principle I) Part of this safeguard is to always being aware of perceptions and how those perceptions may change the professional relationship with a client.

Professional responsibility: If Mary Beth had put the security blocks on her page which would allow only invited friends to see her page, she would have been acting more responsibly. The addiction professional recognizes that those who assume the role of assisting others to live a more responsible life take on the ethical accountability of living responsibly. The addiction professional recognizes that even in a life well-lived, harm might be done to others by works and actions. (NAADAC Code of Ethics, Principle IV)

Discretion: Mary Beth’s actions in regards to Facebook appear to be poor professional judgment. She certainly has a right to her personal life and to enjoy herself. On the other hand, professional judgment includes how we conduct ourselves in public, even in our leisure time which includes what we post on a Facebook page for all to view.

Do no harm: Although Mary Beth is not in recovery herself, the posting of the picture of her drinking may cause undue influence on clients to assume that if it is OK for a counselor to participate in these activities that it must be acceptable for them also. Or clients may believe that Mary Beth is not “practicing what she preaches”. Again, often we are talking about perceptions which may not always be reality.

Situation 3 – Information Sharing

Carla is in private practice working as a substance abuse professional. She recently joined Facebook and being a very social person, enjoys the interactions each evening with her Facebook friends. One of those friends is a counselor at a local substance abuse in-patient facility. For the past few evenings Carla has noticed that her friend has begun to post information about clients she has seen that day, funny things they have done or unusual crises they have experienced. Although her friend is not stating client names she has told others where she works.

What are the Ethical Concerns?

Confidentiality: We are to make every effort to protect the confidentiality of client information. (NAADAC Code of Ethics, Principle III) Carla’s friend has stated where she works and now she is talking about clients of that facility. She is not honoring confidentiality, even though she is not stating client identifying information. She may inadvertently be giving enough information that someone could deduce to whom she is referring. This is also a violation of client rights and their expectation that their information will be protected.

Due diligence: We are to be conscientious and careful in all of our actions when it concerns clients and our professional life. We, as professional counselors, should make every effort to avoid “gossiping” about clients. It is possible that, unbeknownst to this counselor, a client may be a “friend of a friend” on Facebook and actually can see what this counselor is posting and recognizes that the counselor is telling her story.

Legal concern: Carla is bound under 42 CFR Part 2 and HIPAA to make every reasonable effort to protect client information. This type of behavior could result in litigation.

Resolving Ethical Issues: Carla has a responsibility to go to her friend and discuss the ethical and legal concerns she has regarding her friend’s behavior. If her friend is unwilling to change that behavior, Carla next needs to seek supervision and consider her licensure reporting responsibility. (NAADAC Code of Ethics, principle VIII)

Situation 4 – Venting Frustrations

Martin has been having a difficult time at work lately. It is increasingly more stressful with an increased number of clients who are exhibiting more severe symptoms, fewer staff and fewer resources. He has recently been having disagreements with his supervisor. He has also begun to post his “venting” on his Facebook page.

What are the Ethical Concerns?

Discretion: As professionals we have an obligation to use utmost discretion in all of our professional life. Ethically, Martin would be well served to seek other supervision or peer support in his stressful situation rather than venting on his Facebook page.

Professional relationships: Martin is not building, supporting or treating his professional relationships respectfully. As professionals we are to respect other professionals by going to them when we have problems that are affecting us. I have heard many accounts of people losing their jobs as a result of airing their complaints about their jobs and employers on Facebook.

Situation 5 – Compromised Testimonials?

A 12 step focused residential treatment facility developed a Facebook page as a means of advertising. It is also a means for keeping a connection with former clients. These former clients may also write comments on their experience with the treatment program. Recently the administrator contacted former clients requesting that they post testimonials on Facebook. A counselor conducting patient aftercare was made aware of the request and was concerned about confidentiality.

What are the Ethical Concerns?

Informed consent and Confidentiality: In this situation clients need to be fully informed about the risks of posting testimonials on Facebook. If they do post voluntarily, they should be informed of the risk of confidentiality being compromised.

Due Diligence: This treatment facility, as well as the counselor who was made aware of the request, have an obligation to be diligent in the care of clients and sensitive client information.

Exploitation: Is the facility using client testimonials to help others who are suffering with addictions or are they using this to further their business and bring in revenue? The concern here is whether or not it is exploiting clients to ask them to help in marketing a program by posting personal testimonials about their treatment experience. Clients may not understand the far-reaching outcomes of this course of action. Treatment programs need to consider all aspects of their decisions to use media such as Facebook to market their programs.

Reporting

Often I hear professionals say that they hesitate to report unethical behavioral because they are friends with the person or they don’t want to hurt the other person’s career. As licensed or certified professionals, we have an ethical and legal obligation to report unethical behavior that cannot be resolved or that is such an egregious violation that it is beyond being resolved.

As technology grows and becomes more and more available, we as professionals must always consider the ramifications of our actions when using any technology, including social network sites such as Facebook. When ethics are violated, we have an obligation to address the issue and report to licensure boards when necessary.

Be true to yourself, your profession and your colleagues.

Source: http://www.naadac.org/component/content/article/48-publications/643-careless-use-of-facebook-can-jeopardize-your-career

Enhanced by Zemanta

Can Facebook Updates Predict Depression Ahead of Doctors?

Post written by Jamie Condliffe

Can Facebook Updates Predict Depression Ahead of Doctors?We all have friends that post ambiguous, leading or confessional posts on Facebook. Often, they’re plain irritating—but could they be used to spot mental health problems ahead of trained clinicians?

A report in the New York Times suggests that specialists in adolescent mental health believe that dark status updates shouldn’t simply be ignored, but used as early warning signs of depression.

During a research study run last year at the University of Washington, 30 percent of 200 students posted updates that met the American Psychiatric Association’s criteria for a symptom of depression, “reporting feelings of worthlessness or hopelessness, insomnia or sleeping too much, and difficulty concentrating” according to the NYT.

“You can identify adolescents and young adults on Facebook who are showing signs of being at risk, who would benefit from a clinical visit for screening,” said Dr. Megan A. Moreno, one of the researchers, to the NYT.

But the problem is sifting the signal from the noise: which status updates really point to problems, and which are harmless? At the moment, it’s still difficult to tell.

Regardless, clinicians are beginning to use updates as a complement to their usual practice. Dr. Gregory T. Eells, director of Cornell’s counseling and psychological services, said to the NYT:

“People do post very distressing things. Sometimes they’re just letting off steam, using Facebook as something between a diary and an op-ed piece. But sometimes we’ll tell the team, ‘check in on this person.’ ”

Obviously, tentative steps are required when using Facebook to help with diagnosis of mental illness, and often time clinicians might be dealing with false positives. But when a person’s future health—or even their life—is at stake, false positives aren’t, perhaps, too much of a problem. While analyzing Facebook statuses will never replace human intervention, it might stop diagnoses slipping through the net. [New York Times]

Source: http://gizmodo.com/5887934/can-facebook-updates-predict-depression-ahead-of-doctors