Greetings,

As a "listener" to this list, a patient in 5th yr of therapy, and a
historian, I'd like to say that I appreciate the concern for
confidentiality.  However, I don't see how the list can have the sort of
discussion than many people would like to have, and still not use clinical
material.  How come this didn't come up with Chris M's lengthy and detailed
clinical description?

Having asked to be on this list, and curious about how things are discussed
in such a forum, I think if I found my dreams and my situation discussed
here it would be okay.  As long as respectful and thoughtful care is used in
responses, which I found was shown in the previous attempt to discuss a
particular case, I don't see why not.  How is it different from cases and
examples given in textbook discussions, e.g., Greenson, or Greenberg and
Mitchell?

Jane Camerini

At 12:26 PM 2/19/97 -0600, Karen Conner wrote:
>Several persons expressed concerns either via the listserv or in private
>emails as to my discussing patient-specific clinical material on the net.  I
>acknowledge the risks involved, and appreciate the feedback.  I did disguise
>aspects of the patient in an attempt to preserve confidentiality, but the
>point is well-taken.  I'm not sure how to address the problem of wanting
>clinical discussion on the net without being able to talk about specific
>clients/patients.  What do you all think?  What do our various ethical codes
>dictate or imply regarding this problem?  How secure is this particular
>listserv--it should be more secure in the sense that not everyone is able to
>join, or is this the case?
>
>As for your other interesting comments regarding the clinical material I
>offered, I will get back to each of you later, when I have a little more
>time to think and email.
>
>Karen Conner, Ph.D.
>Illinois State University
>[log in to unmask]
>