Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Contents:

Information:

  • Access
  • Open access

Actions:

      • Send article to Kindle

        To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

        Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

        Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

        Can deception be therapeutic?
        Available formats
        ×

        Send article to Dropbox

        To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

        Can deception be therapeutic?
        Available formats
        ×

        Send article to Google Drive

        To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

        Can deception be therapeutic?
        Available formats
        ×
Export citation

Sir: We are gratified that the case we described (Sandford et al, Psychiatric Bulletin, June 2001, 25, 206-280) stimulated such interest and controversy. However, much of Dr Adshead's commentary (Psychiatric Bulletin, October 2001, 25, 374-375) related to the general issue of deceiving patients and failed to take into account the particular features of the case that made it exceptional.

First, the case was not ‘ordinary’ insofar as we were dealing with a person with a pervasive developmental disorder whose communication and cognitive difficulties lay at the heart of this dilemma. Adshead wonders if it had been possible to talk to the patient about moving over a long period. As we described, the many previous attempts to do this had caused extreme anxiety that had precipitated assaultative behaviour and led to the potential placements falling through. Adshead appears to assume that the communication issues for our patient were the same as for the non-autistic majority, unfortunately this is not supported by the research evidence.

Second, Adshead was incorrect to describe this as a forensic case; the patient was detained under a civil section and had been for many years inappropriately placed in a forensic facility, hence the impetus to move her into an autistic friendly environment.

Third, again as detailed in the case, her suspicions around the time issue are unfounded, planning around the move took many months of careful negotiation. Fourth, at no point was false information given to the patient (i.e. the patient was not told a lie), we rather withheld information. Last, the concept of human dignity is now widely used in a variety of complex bioethical debates from care of children with behavioural disorders through palliative care to the patenting of DNA and xenotransplantation.