Confidentiality in the sexual abuse of adolescents

Abstract

According to the author, some or all of the following six reasons may be cited to justify breaking professional secrecy: 1) to prevent or reduce harm to the person or persons affected; 2) to produce a benefit for the person or persons affected; 3) to prevent or reduce harm to the professional or to third parties; 4) to produce a benefit for the professional or for third parties,; 5) by legal obligation; and 6) to punish a person or persons who have committed an offence or to demonstrate its seriousness to society.

This article subjects four of these reasons (1, 3, 5 and 6) to an analysis of whether situations of which professionals are aware involving sexual abuse of adolescents should always and without exception be reported to the Public Prosecutor. The conclusions reached are: i) notification to the Public Prosecutor by psycho-social-educational and healthcare professionals of a situation involving sexual abuse of an adolescent on the basis of the first and third reasons is ethically justified provided that certain requirements are met; and ii) if notification to the Public Prosecutor is solely based on the fifth or sixth reason, it is not ethically justified and constitutes bad professional practice. This means that, in some exceptional circumstances, good practice demands that the Public Prosecutor not be informed of situations of sexual abuse that have already occurred.