ACT ThoughtfullyACT Thoughtfully

  

Journal of Ethics in Mental Journal of Ethics in Mental HealthHealth

2015 2015

40 Ethics Vignettes40 Ethics Vignettes

In 2006 the JEMH published a series In 2006 the JEMH published a series of 23 ethics vignettes looking at real of 23 ethics vignettes looking at real issues that arise on Assertive issues that arise on Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) teams. Community Treatment (ACT) teams. We have continued to collect real We have continued to collect real case reports and 40 vignettes are case reports and 40 vignettes are now included in this feature, with now included in this feature, with more to come as the years go by.more to come as the years go by.

Series Editors:Series Editors:

John Maher MA MD FRCPCJohn Maher MA MD FRCPC

Barrie & Cobourg ACT Teams, Barrie & Cobourg ACT Teams,

Ontario, CanadaOntario, Canada

Sarah Garside PhD MD FRCPCSarah Garside PhD MD FRCPC

Haldimand-Norfolk ACT Team,Haldimand-Norfolk ACT Team,

Ontario , CanadaOntario , Canada

Day to Day ACT Care: a Day to Day ACT Care: a collection of real casescollection of real cases

Many or most case situations presented here may be familiar to ACT Team members. Will all ACT team members view each of these as ethical problems? Were others aware that all of these things happen?

3 part case presentation format: The Case: (actual case or a composite) The Question: (e.g. “What should be done?”) A Comment: (e.g. “When in doubt don’t do it”)

Family/Caregiver IssuesFamily/Caregiver IssuesCase 1: Beverley is a 25 year old capable woman with

schizophrenia who lacks insight and lives at home with her parents. Every few months she starts to go without sleep and then decompensates. Her mother secretly puts lorazepam into her food when she sees a change in sleep pattern and this corrects the problem. The mother told the ACT team what she is doing and how this has kept her daughter out of hospital.

The Question: Should ACT staff try to stop this practice?

A Comment: The mother knows it is illegal and deceptive but is clear that it is her right as a parent to do so. The ACT team has remained silent on this matter with the client.

Case 2Case 2

The parents of a 33 year old male with schizophrenia do everything for him and he has no chores or responsibilities while living with them. The mother explains that in her culture this is the way it should be. The client is quite happy with this but the ACT team have trouble motivating the client to accomplish any rehab goals.

The Question: Should the ACT team try to educate the family about how they believe their efforts are being undermined by the family system?

A Comment: Cultural sensitivity should not be confused with family dynamics that are actually harmful to the client. Tact and modeling are critical.

Confidentiality IssuesConfidentiality Issues Case 3: Lois is adamant that she does not want one ACT team

member to know a particular bit of information about her (“I am gay”); the information has clinical but not safety significance.

The Question: Should you risk splitting, fragmented care, or inconsistency of approach by allowing or fostering selective disclosure?

A Comment: No. Open sharing of information is the acceptable price of team care, and is particularly necessary where safety is a factor. This operational mode must be explained up front. Nonetheless selective disclosure occurs and we must trust the discretion and judgment of our fellow clinicians as they, and we, inevitably filter the information flow.

Case 4Case 4 Hospital policy requires mandatory disclosure of NCR status

to a potential employer by the client or the ACT team. Susan really wants a particular job and begs the team to not disclose because the policy is unfair. She was charged with uttering threats to a family member (while manic) but she has no criminal record or history of violence otherwise. She is fine on meds and is happily compliant.

The Question: Should staff withhold the information in the client’s best interest?

A Comment: The hospital policy is liability based and should probably be respected but seeking the patient’s permission for fuller disclosure (i.e. the context of the events and how well she is doing now) may serve to allay an employer’s concerns in this instance.

Case 5Case 5

The landlord calls to say that Bill has been suggesting he would like to have a barbeque in the hallway of his large apartment building. The landlord demands to know if Bill has caused fires in the past (the client hasn’t; the barbeque comment is most likely an attempt at conversation); he will be evicted unless there is a response. The paranoid client refuses to give permission for staff to talk with the landlord.

The Question: Do you tell the landlord the client is not a safety concern?

A Comment: The ‘letter of confidentiality law’ should not violate the spirit which aims at protecting best interests. Homelessness is a serious consequence.

Case 6Case 6

The streets are your office; team members regularly meet clients on sidewalks and in coffee shops for assessments.

The Question: If the client wants this, should the team go along with it?

A Comment: Yes. If best efforts at discretion are maintained and the client is not put at risk with public disclosure of status.

Case 7Case 7

ACT staff ask neighbours how a client is doing and if they have any concerns about him. The justification is that everyone in town knows that he is followed by a mental health team.

The Question: Is there a breach in confidentiality?

A Comment: Yes. But if the information is volunteered unsolicited it can be accepted.

Care IssuesCare Issues

Case 8: Joanne enjoys wearing brightly coloured, oddly matched clothes that will make her stand out in any crowd. She is unconcerned about appearance. A particular ACT clinician always makes her dress more “appropriately” before allowing her to come out on her outing.

The Question: Is this demand to change clothes acceptable?

A Comment: Some of what is justified under a therapeutic guise may be about clinician comfort or over-protectiveness.

Case 9Case 9

Alice is a 54 yr female who has a 25 year history of schizophrenia. She lives on a disability pension in an apartment with 3 cats and 2 dogs. Her apartment reeks of urine and her chairs are always wet and sticky. She has no concerns about hygiene, and never has visitors except for ACT staff?

The Question: Should ACT staff force her to clean as a condition of involvement?

A Comment: Health reasons prompt the need for cleaning but beyond that, staff comfort is not the issue, although the impact of cleanliness on personal relationships is a legitimate therapeutic and rehab concern.

Case 10Case 10

Ben has a long history of schizophrenia and 18 years of continuous institutionalization. He murdered someone while psychotic a long time ago. Now deemed capable and in the community, compliance is a challenge for the ACT team, and he decompensates quickly. He fires the team every time he sees a clinician. He arranged for a family doctor (who didn’t know his history) to prescribe his meds, and told the team once more that they were fired.

The Question: Should the team accept the ‘firing’ because he has arranged to get meds elsewhere?

A Comment: The team very reluctantly discontinued services with the door left open to return. He has repeatedly been hospitalized since.

Case 11Case 11 Mike always agrees to any suggested medication or dose

change. He has persistent delusions that an electronic chip is in his brain preparing him to be transformed into Jesus. He takes the meds happily because they can have no effect on someone with his special powers. The psychiatrist has not declared him incapable and the team never raises this question at client reviews.

The Question: Should he be declared incapable and a substitute decision maker sought?

A Comment: Yes. However, the reality (as on inpatient wards) is that clinicians sometimes hide behind the presumption of capacity as long as treatment plans are followed.

Case 12Case 12

Jim has “good days and bad days”; he has schizophrenia with fluctuating or variable capacity. If team members don’t get agreement on a course of treatment on a given day, they know they will another day when he is either feeling more vulnerable and wanting help, or when his mood has improved.

The Question: Is revisiting a decision at a time that you believe you will get your preferred outcome appropriate?

A Comment: Staff must be conscientious about revisiting decisions only when they suspect the extant ones are not his most reasonable decisions or ones that are consistent with his more stable values. But we must remember, people change their minds.

Case 13Case 13

Adam has severe paranoia and has had extremely serious suicide attempts when ill. He does extremely well and is able to work and maintain relationships when on his depot medication. He completely lacks insight. Every two weeks he refuses his injection, is then told by the psychiatrist that his substitute decision maker has authorized it, he in turn says he will leave the country to escape “evil psychiatrists”, and finally the psychiatrist says he must accept the injection or the police will be called and he will be taken to the hospital where he will get it anyway. He complies.

The Question: Is this repeated exchange acceptable? A Comment: He keeps coming back and hasn’t left the country; is

each return motivated by fear or is it an expression of subconscious

recognition of the benefits of the injection?

Case 14Case 14 Joanne, an incapable client refuses her IM Joanne, an incapable client refuses her IM

(injection medication) in the community (injection medication) in the community (there is no threat to life or limb, and no (there is no threat to life or limb, and no likelihood of self harm or harm to others). The likelihood of self harm or harm to others). The Health Care Consent Act in Ontario Health Care Consent Act in Ontario authorizes valid substitute consent for authorizes valid substitute consent for treatment for this incapable client. treatment for this incapable client.

The Question: The Question: Does it also authorize the Does it also authorize the meansmeans necessary to deliver the treatment? necessary to deliver the treatment?

A Comment: A Comment: Yes! A 2008 case settled before Yes! A 2008 case settled before the Ontario Superior Court has spelled this the Ontario Superior Court has spelled this out clearly for the first time and it has not out clearly for the first time and it has not been appealed. How do you do this in reality?been appealed. How do you do this in reality?

Case 15Case 15

Mark is required to follow a jointly prepared but staff imposed budget because he overspends on junk food and cigarettes. Although financially capable, staff control his weekly spending money. He wants more spending money and he resents this tremendously.

The Question: Should the team interfere in a financially capable person’s decisions in this way?

A Comment: Yes, if his rent and basic necessities are not being covered.

Case 16Case 16

Staff buy cheap cigarettes for clients from the native reserve store. Sometimes groups of clients are taken on “country drives” to the same store.

The Question: Should staff do this? A Comment: No. It’s a clear health issue.

However, it is not really this simple. Savings may be spent on better food and thereby lead to an improvement in health.

Case 17Case 17

Margaret, an artist, wants to give her favourite team member a small, beautiful watercolour painting as an expression of gratitude. She says it is important to her that it be accepted.

The Question: Should it be accepted? A Comment: Substantial gifts are always refused; small,

inexpensive gifts might be accepted only if they can be given to the whole team (e.g. this was explained to Margaret and the painting was displayed on the ACT office wall).The safer course may be absolute refusal of all gifts by all staff.

Case 18Case 18

Jimmy, a 22 year old with schizophrenia, has a calendar with pictures of naked women displayed on his living room wall. This has upset some female staff who asked him to move it to his bedroom where it will be out of sight during visits. Jimmy grew up in a family where pornography was displayed openly in the house. He tells staff to mind their own business and “just get over it”. These particular staff feel they should not have to see him now because of their discomfort. (He has no history of violence or inappropriate sexual behaviour.)

The Question: Have team members overstepped their bounds? A Comment: Yes. Education about sexism can be done, but he is

free to adorn his apartment with legal material.

Case 19Case 19

A 27 year old with stable schizophrenia remarked to a staff member that “those brown people are different”. He further relates with open approval how some “brown people” were harassed to the point they left his village. At a family meeting his mother is openly and proudly racist. When challenged on their views they are disgusted by the team members’ “big city stupidity”. Thereafter, staff never talk with the mother.

The Question: Should any staff of color have to see this client (he doesn’t want to see them)?

A Comment: Staff comfort should be considered because countertransference may be blinding and diminish therapeutic efficacy. Some will argue the possibility of a corrective experience should not be avoided. Whatever the course, the decision for involvement is not the client’s but the team’s.

Case 20Case 20

Clinicians regularly do the laundry and clean the house of some clients “who will never do it themselves and won’t do it even if you directly help them”. The clinical issues are dependency and disempowerment and they are reviewed case by case.

The Question: Is this even an ethical issue (enabling vs disabling)? A Comment: Sometimes it feels like an ethical issue and

sometimes it doesn’t which may reflect projections, intuitions, or suspicions about a fellow clinician’s motivation. It is easier at times to clean for someone rather than with them, especially if they “never do a good enough job”. This is an issue that is a source of resentment and splitting. “I do cleaning work for clients and so

should you”.

Case 21Case 21

Staff donate food, old TV’s, their used computers, etc. for clients. Most on the team feel these items should be passed on with the explanation that they have been received from anonymous donors. Some staff members say this is silly and that it is just common decency and kindness to give gifts, and they insist on identifying themselves as the source to the respective clients.

The Question: Is revealing yourself as the source simply self serving?

A Comment: Yes. It meets your need and further sets up an “us and them” demarcation and barrier.

Case 22Case 22

A client wants to use a clinician as a job reference because he “doesn’t know anyone else”.

The Question: Should the clinician agree if in good conscience it is believed the client will do a good job and permission for disclosure has been given?

A Comment: We are not sure about this one…

Case 23Case 23

A client on disability sees a dentist who pulls a tooth rather than fills it because an extraction is faster and he only gets a third as much money from the disability plan as he would from a ‘regular customer’ for a filling.

The Question: Should he be reported to his college? A Comment: The Dental College views this as a gray

zone; a choice to extract is an individual clinical call. Dentists are free to refuse care to any clients (including those on disability because they don’t get paid as much to see them).

Case 24Case 24

A 33 year old client is on a government disability (which everyone on the team agrees is barely a subsistence allowance). If he works, an amount equivalent to his wages is deducted from his disability income. He is working under the table in construction.

The Question: Is the team duty bound to report this income, especially if doing so means the client will simply stop working?

A Comment: No. We are not required to report illegal activity unless we have foreknowledge and harm to others is possible. (Some argue, cogently and correctly, that the underground economy is broadly harmful to society as a whole and unfairly burdens tax paying citizens.)

Case 25Case 25

Joe is 34 years old and has a history of significant substance abuse, with repeated visits to the E.R. with delirium and intoxication. He always ingests all pills in his possession. With this client it was agreed that he would only have access to his medications through twice daily visits to the pharmacy for a one time dose on each visit. This is a huge demand on his time.

The Question: Is this acceptable? A Comment: In the alternative, he overdoses

repeatedly.

Team DynamicsTeam Dynamics

Case 26: At a team meeting it was agreed that staff would stop lending clients money (up to $20 had been lent at various times). There was apparent agreement that it was a boundary crossing that should stop. Subsequently, some team members just kept doing it because they thought the team decision was wrong and punitive. Even after being confronted, the particular team members argued that their college or conscience did not prohibit the lending of money.

The Question: Must they go along with the majority view? A Comment: Don’t soil your own nest. Collective wisdom

should be trusted; “buy-in” and follow through for decisions should not be passive-aggressive or lukewarm.

Case 27Case 27

A client rented an apartment through A client rented an apartment through the superintendant in a building the superintendant in a building owned by an ACT team nurse.owned by an ACT team nurse.

The Question: Must the nurse evict him because of a conflict of interest?

A Comment: No; but she should not have any direct involvement in any housing issues that arise thereafter.

Case 28Case 28

The hospital that oversees the The hospital that oversees the community based ACT Team has community based ACT Team has ordered the team to hire an active ordered the team to hire an active ACT client to clean the office as this ACT client to clean the office as this will be cheaper than an outside will be cheaper than an outside agency and it will give the client work agency and it will give the client work experience.experience.

The Question: The Question: Is this appropriate?Is this appropriate? A Comment: No. If he does a bad job

and is fired, what happens to the therapeutic relationship?

Case 29Case 29

Louise has severe bipolar disorder Louise has severe bipolar disorder and punched her husband in the face and punched her husband in the face while manic; he is an ACT client. She while manic; he is an ACT client. She is now on probation and has been is now on probation and has been referred to the same ACT team.referred to the same ACT team.

The Question: The Question: Do we accept her?Do we accept her? A Comment: A Comment: Yes, if her husband Yes, if her husband

supports the decision. No, if he does supports the decision. No, if he does not.not.

Case 30Case 30

Ellen, a 54 year old former school teacher Ellen, a 54 year old former school teacher who has schizophrenia and has been who has schizophrenia and has been socially isolated for years, starts dating a socially isolated for years, starts dating a well known community predator (assault, well known community predator (assault, stalking, manslaughter). Ellen is in love!stalking, manslaughter). Ellen is in love!

The Question: The Question: Does the ACT Team have a Does the ACT Team have a duty to warn?duty to warn?

A Comment: A Comment: Yes. His convictions are on Yes. His convictions are on the public record and the client is the public record and the client is vulnerable.vulnerable.

Case 31Case 31

Tim, a 60 year old client with bipolar Tim, a 60 year old client with bipolar disorder, wrote a book. He wants to disorder, wrote a book. He wants to pay the ACT team assistant $1000 to pay the ACT team assistant $1000 to type it for him because he trusts her.type it for him because he trusts her.

The Question: The Question: Can she accept the Can she accept the job?job?

A Comment: A Comment: No. The conflict of No. The conflict of interest could affect the team’s interest could affect the team’s therapeutic relationship. therapeutic relationship.

Case 32Case 32

Susan is 35, bipolar, and abuses crack. She Susan is 35, bipolar, and abuses crack. She keeps no money for food and has been beaten keeps no money for food and has been beaten up by drug dealers repeatedly. She agreed to up by drug dealers repeatedly. She agreed to hand over control of her finances to a trustee hand over control of her finances to a trustee for a year. She has now changed her mind, for a year. She has now changed her mind, but the ACT team and trustee have told her but the ACT team and trustee have told her that her consent is irrevocable (a Ulysses that her consent is irrevocable (a Ulysses contract) contract)

The Question: The Question: Can they do this?Can they do this? A comment: A comment: Legally no. Morally, yes. (duty Legally no. Morally, yes. (duty

to protect)to protect)

Case 33Case 33 Tim is 25 years old, has schizophrenia and Tim is 25 years old, has schizophrenia and

autism, and lives in the country with his autism, and lives in the country with his supportive mother. ACT staff bring him to the supportive mother. ACT staff bring him to the city for recreational events and he repeatedly city for recreational events and he repeatedly arranges to meet a pot dealer at these events. arranges to meet a pot dealer at these events. Pot makes him psychotic, aggressive, and Pot makes him psychotic, aggressive, and suicidal.suicidal.

The Question: The Question: Should ACT staff stop bringing Should ACT staff stop bringing him to the city?him to the city?

A comment: A comment: If his life is at stake with a If his life is at stake with a serious suicide attempt then they should stop. serious suicide attempt then they should stop. If not, then his participation in social activities If not, then his participation in social activities should continue.should continue.

Case 34Case 34 Dan is 37, has schizophrenia, and lives with his Dan is 37, has schizophrenia, and lives with his

mother (from Newfoundland). His mom mother (from Newfoundland). His mom frequently insists that ACT staff accept baked frequently insists that ACT staff accept baked goods she has prepared as an expression of goods she has prepared as an expression of appreciation for all the help. She is a good cook!appreciation for all the help. She is a good cook!

The Question: The Question: Should ACT staff accept the Should ACT staff accept the baked goods? Only if they share them with the baked goods? Only if they share them with the team or other clients and tell the mother so?team or other clients and tell the mother so?

A comment: A comment: Feeding guests is a cultural norm Feeding guests is a cultural norm for this mother and accepting her hospitality is for this mother and accepting her hospitality is important for maintaining the relationship. important for maintaining the relationship. Sharing the food with others may diffuse some Sharing the food with others may diffuse some potential conflicts (e.g. favouritism).potential conflicts (e.g. favouritism).

Case 35Case 35 An ACT clinician tells the team that she An ACT clinician tells the team that she

insists on leaving on her winter boots when insists on leaving on her winter boots when visiting clients in their homes because it is visiting clients in their homes because it is too time consuming and troublesome to take too time consuming and troublesome to take them off, but adds she may take them off in them off, but adds she may take them off in apartments that are clean.apartments that are clean.

The Question: The Question: Is this an ethical issue or Is this an ethical issue or simply a matter of courtesy versus efficiency?simply a matter of courtesy versus efficiency?

A comment: A comment: It is an ethical issue…we must It is an ethical issue…we must never forget that we are guests who should never forget that we are guests who should model decency, dignity, and respect!model decency, dignity, and respect!

Case 36Case 36 Tom, 41, has schizophrenia and lives in a Tom, 41, has schizophrenia and lives in a

beautiful house with loving parents who are beautiful house with loving parents who are devoutly religious. His psychosis clears devoutly religious. His psychosis clears wonderfully on meds. He has renounced his wonderfully on meds. He has renounced his childhood religion. His parents need to believe childhood religion. His parents need to believe this apostasy is caused by mental illness or they this apostasy is caused by mental illness or they will be forced by their religious community to will be forced by their religious community to shun him. The client wants the ACT team to shun him. The client wants the ACT team to collude in the pretense that protects his housing collude in the pretense that protects his housing and family connections. and family connections.

The Question: The Question: Do we tell the parents he is still Do we tell the parents he is still sick?sick?

A comment: A comment: No; but we should distance No; but we should distance ourselves from this complex family dynamic.ourselves from this complex family dynamic.

Case 37Case 37

Lois, 32, has schizophrenia and is frequently Lois, 32, has schizophrenia and is frequently victimized by predators. Her current landlord victimized by predators. Her current landlord pressures her into sex; she complies pressures her into sex; she complies reluctantly, not because she fears eviction but reluctantly, not because she fears eviction but because this is how she copes and gets drugs because this is how she copes and gets drugs and deals with her loneliness.and deals with her loneliness.

The Question: The Question: Beyond sexual health Beyond sexual health education and continuing support, is their education and continuing support, is their anything else that needs to be done?anything else that needs to be done?

A comment: A comment: No. As vulnerable as she is, she No. As vulnerable as she is, she is capable of consenting to sexual activity.is capable of consenting to sexual activity.

Case 38Case 38 Bob, 57, has lived in a nice family home with Bob, 57, has lived in a nice family home with

his elderly mother for decades. Because of his his elderly mother for decades. Because of his illness, at night he sometimes screams very illness, at night he sometimes screams very loudly. He is never violent. 15 neighbours loudly. He is never violent. 15 neighbours signed a petition and gave it to the police, who signed a petition and gave it to the police, who then met with ACT staff. Neighbours want him then met with ACT staff. Neighbours want him out of their neighbourhood.out of their neighbourhood.

The Question: The Question: Should ACT staff try to Should ACT staff try to relocate him?relocate him?

A comment: A comment: It is his choice how to respond to It is his choice how to respond to this hurtful petition; ACT staff will support him this hurtful petition; ACT staff will support him as always.as always.

Case 39Case 39 Jack is 27 and has severe schizophrenia. He Jack is 27 and has severe schizophrenia. He

has been violent when ill. When on his monthly has been violent when ill. When on his monthly injection he does much better but he injection he does much better but he continually resists the medication. The team continually resists the medication. The team figured out that if they give him $20 to accept figured out that if they give him $20 to accept each injection that compliance is no longer a each injection that compliance is no longer a problem (and many inpatient admissions are problem (and many inpatient admissions are prevented)prevented)

The Question: The Question: Is offering money for Is offering money for compliance unduly coercive?compliance unduly coercive?

A comment: A comment: He is better, the community is He is better, the community is safer, and health care costs are reduced.safer, and health care costs are reduced.

Case 40Case 40

A 37 year old client has end stage heart A 37 year old client has end stage heart failure. He was told by his cardiologist that failure. He was told by his cardiologist that he is not eligible for a heart transplant he is not eligible for a heart transplant because he has schizophrenia.because he has schizophrenia.

The Question: The Question: Is this a stigmatizing and Is this a stigmatizing and unfair exclusion criterion? unfair exclusion criterion?

A comment: A comment: Absolutely! The cardiologist Absolutely! The cardiologist backpedalled when challenged but we can’t backpedalled when challenged but we can’t help but wonder how our client will fare help but wonder how our client will fare when potential transplant recipients are when potential transplant recipients are compared.compared.

Acknowledgements: Our thanks to Acknowledgements: Our thanks to our colleagues for sharing and our colleagues for sharing and discussing these cases with us.discussing these cases with us.

Competing interests: noneCompeting interests: none Addresses for correspondence:Addresses for correspondence:

jmaher@cmhastarttalking.ca

garsides@mcmaster.cagarsides@mcmaster.ca