Sport and Exercise Psychology Review - Sport Psychology Goes to ...

Issues of Confidentiality, Privacy and Privilege
sions is available to the coach. The practitioners
get around the problem of confidentiality
by informing the athletes that anything they
say in sessions with ‘performance psychologists’
may be transmitted to the coaches.
Their caveat to the athletes is: ‘So, if you don’t
want some information about you getting
back to the coach, then please don’t talk to us
about whatever it is.’ This tact will probably
not help athletes feel secure and open up
about their problems. If athletes make
appointments with the Performance Psychology
Department, and the practitioners have
heard nothing from the coaches, then the
first step is to call the coaches, inform them of
the appointment, and inquire as to what the
coaches know about the athletes’ concerns
and why they might be seeking services. The
right to privacy is violated even before the athlete
speaks to a psychologist. This exploitative
neo-Soviet system is a major step backwards
for the field. The end result will most likely be
that some athletes will be helped with performance
and that many athletes will clam up,
and struggle with their problems alone.
The required
In many countries, psychologists are required
by law, and by their ethical codes, to waive
confidentiality. Evidence of child or elder
abuse and threat of harm to self or others
(and accompanying duty to warn) are examples
of instances where breaks in confidentiality
are mandated. The duty to warn
stems from the Tarasoff case (Tarasoff v. The
Regents of the University of California,
1976). A student-client in counselling was
distraught with the break-up of a relationship
with a woman and revealed in counselling
that he was contemplating hurting
her. The counsellor informed the school
security personnel. They questioned him,
decided that he was not a serious threat, and
released him. He later killed Ms Tarasoff.
The threat, voiced in the counselling relationship,
to Ms Tarasoff was later revealed,
and the family of the victim brought suit.
The court ruled that the counsellor should
have done more and should have informed
Ms Tarasoff that she was at risk.
The rules about when confidentiality will
be waived are quite clear in most countries.
What is not so clear is whether sport psychologists
spell out, in unmistakeable terms,
these rules to their clients from the very
beginning of service. It is awkward to inform
clients that if the psychologist hears evidence
of harm to self or others, that the sanctity of
confidentiality will be broken. This reticence
to bring up the topic is something sport psychologists
will have to get over. If they feel
awkward or uncomfortable talking over
these issues, and avoid them, then in many
countries they are actually in violation of
their own ethical codes. In the American Psychological
Association’s Ethical Principles of
Psychologists (APA, 2002) it clearly states:
4.02 Discussing the Limits of Confidentiality
(a) Psychologists discuss with persons (including,
to the extent feasible, persons who are
legally incapable of giving informed consent
and their legal representatives) and organizations
with whom they establish a scientific or
professional relationship (1) the relevant limits
of confidentiality and (2) the foreseeable uses of
the information generated through their psychological
activities. (See also Standard 3.10,
Informed Consent.)
(b) Unless it is not feasible or is contraindicated,
the discussion of confidentiality occurs
at the outset of the relationship and thereafter
as new circumstances may warrant.
(c) Psychologists who offer services, products,
or information via electronic transmission
inform clients/patients of the risks to privacy
and limits of confidentiality.
The BPS has similar guidelines. See Cogan
(2000) for a good case example of the ethical
and legal problems associated with working
with a suicidal athlete where the issue of
breaking confidentiality is illustrated.
Confidentiality and working with teams
In one-on-one sessions behind closed doors,
confidentiality is a relatively straightforward
issue. In group work with whole teams, or
subgroups within a team, confidentiality
becomes problematic. The sport psychologist
Sport & Exercise Psychology Review Vol 1 No 2 9