Book contents
- Fertility Counseling: Clinical Guide
- Fertility Counseling: Clinical Guide
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface
- Contributors
- I Introduction
- II Therapeutic Approaches
- III Third Party Reproduction: Assessment and Preparation
- IV Addressing the Needs of Diverse Populations
- V Special Topics in Fertility Counseling
- VI Practice Issues
- The International Glossary on Infertility and Fertility Care, 2017
- Index
- References
VI - Practice Issues
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 November 2022
Edited by
Book contents
- Fertility Counseling: Clinical Guide
- Fertility Counseling: Clinical Guide
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface
- Contributors
- I Introduction
- II Therapeutic Approaches
- III Third Party Reproduction: Assessment and Preparation
- IV Addressing the Needs of Diverse Populations
- V Special Topics in Fertility Counseling
- VI Practice Issues
- The International Glossary on Infertility and Fertility Care, 2017
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Fertility Counseling: Clinical Guide , pp. 255 - 281Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
References
Greenbaum, Z. How well is telepsychology working? Researchers are pinpointing what we know – and what we need to learn – about these treatment options. Monit Psychol 2020;51(5):46.Google Scholar
Morgan, RD, Patrick, AR, Magaletta, PR. Does the use of telemental health alter the treatment experience? Inmates’ perceptions of telemental health versus face-to-face treatment modalities. J Consult Clin Psychol 2008;76(1):158–162.Google Scholar
Jenkins-Guarnieri, MA, Pruitt, LD, Luxton, DD, Johnson, K. Patient perceptions of telemental health: systematic review of direct comparisons to in-person psychotherapeutic treatments. Telemedicine and e-Health 2015;21(8):652–660.Google Scholar
Topooco, N, Riper, H, Araya, R, et al. Attitudes towards digital treatment for depression: a European stakeholder survey. Internet Interventions 2017;8:1–9.Google Scholar
Shklarski, L, Abrams, A, Bakst, E. Navigating changes in the physical and psychological spaces of psychotherapists during Covid-19: when home becomes the office. Pract Innov 2021;6(1):55–56.Google Scholar
Bailenson, JN. Nonverbal overload: a theoretical argument for the causes of Zoom fatigue. Technology, Mind and Behavior 2021;2(1) (online). https://doi.org/10.1037/tmb0000030Google Scholar
Domar, AD, Gross, J, Rooney, K, Boivin, J. Exploratory randomized trial on the effect of a brief psychological intervention on emotions, quality of life, discontinuation, and pregnancy rates in in vitro fertilization patients. Fertil Steril 2015;104(7):440–451e7.Google Scholar
Aafes van Doorn, K, Békés, V, Prout, TA. Grappling with our therapeutic relationship and professional self-doubt during COVID-19: will we use video therapy again? Counselling Psychology Quarterly 2020 (online). https://doi.org/10.1080/09515070.2020.1773404Google Scholar
Békés, V, Aafes-van Doorn, K. Psychotherapists’ attitudes toward online therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Psychother Integr 2020;30(2):238–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/int0000214Google Scholar
Drum, KB, Littleton, HL. Therapeutic boundaries in telepsychology: unique issues and best practice recommendations. Prof Psychol Res 2014;45(5):309–315.Google Scholar
American Psychological Association. Guidelines for the practice of telepsychology. Am Psychologist 2013;60(9):791–800.Google Scholar
Barrett, JE, Kolmes, K. The practice of tele-mental health: ethical, legal and clinical issues. Pract Innov 2016;1(1):53–66.Google Scholar
American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Recommendations for practices utilizing gestational carriers: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2017;107(2): e3–e10.Google Scholar
Riddle, MP. Psychological assessment of gestational carrier candidates: current approaches, challenges and future considerations. Fertil Steril 2020;13(5):897–902.Google Scholar
American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Guidance on qualifications for fertility counselors: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2021;115(6):1411–1415.Google Scholar
Luxton, DD, Pruitt, LD, Osenbach, JE. Best practices for remote psychological assessment via telehealth technologies. Prof Psychol Res Pract 2014;45(1):27–35. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034547Google Scholar
Grady, BJ, Melcer, T. A retrospective evaluation of telemental health care services for remote military populations. Telemedicine and e-Health 2005;11:551–558. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2005.11.551Google Scholar
Harris, E, Younggren, J. Risk management in the digital world. Prof Psychol Res Pract 2011;42(6):412–418.Google Scholar
References
Swain, M, Petok, WD. Legal issues for fertility counselors. In Covington, SN. Ed. Fertility Counseling Clinical Guide and Case Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015, 296–307.Google Scholar
American Psychological Association. Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Washington, DC: The American Psychological Association, 2016. Available at: www.apa.org/ethics/code [last accessed June 16, 2022].Google Scholar
National Association of Social Workers. Code of Ethics [pamphlet]. Washington, DC: National Association of Social Workers, 2021. Available at: www.socialworkers.org/about/ethics/code-of-ethics [last accessed June 16, 2022].Google Scholar
National Board for Certified Counselors (NBCC). Code of Ethics. Washington, DC. Published 2016. Available at: www.counselorprep.com/nbcc-revised-code-of-ethics/#:~:text=The%20National%20Board%20for%20Certified%20Counselors%20%28NBCC%29%20published,counselors%20certified%20by%20NBCC%20or%20applicants%20for%20certification [last accessed June 16, 2022].Google Scholar
American Association of Marriage and Family Counselors. Code of Ethics. Available at: www.aamft.org/Legal_Ethics/Code_of_Ethics.aspx [last accessed June 16, 2022].Google Scholar
American Psychiatric Association. Ethical Code. The Principles of Medical Ethics with Annotations Especially Applicable to Psychiatry. Published 2013. Available at: www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/ethics [last accessed June 16, 2022].Google Scholar
Code of Ethical Practice for Psychiatric Nursing and Foundations of Psychiatric Nursing Practice. Available at: http://54.65.62.192/english/pdf/ethicalandfoundations.pdf. See also: and www.slideshare.net/guylamunyon/ana-psychiatric-mental-health-scope-and-standards-of-practice [last accessed June 16, 2022].Google Scholar
Human Fertilisation Embryology Authority. Code of Practice, 9th ed., with 2019 updates. Available at: https://portal.hfea.gov.uk/knowledge-base/read-the-code-of-practice/ [last accessed June 16, 2022].Google Scholar
ANZICA. Guidelines on Professional Standards of Practice: Infertility Counseling. Published August 2018. Available at: www.fertilitysociety.com.au/professional-groups-anzica-australia-new-zealand/ [last accessed June 16, 2022].Google Scholar
Guidance on Qualifications for Fertility Counselors: A Committee Opinion. Fertil Steril 2021;115(6):1411–1415.Google Scholar
International Infertility Counseling Association. Compendium of Fertility Counseling Organizations Across the Globe. Available at: www.iico-infertilitycounseling.org [last accessed June 16, 2022].Google Scholar
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Public Law 104–191, 110 Stat. 1936. Washington, DC: The United States Senate, 1996.Google Scholar
PCISSD. Data Security Standards Overview [Internet]. [Cited May 29, 2014] Available at: www.pcisecuritystandards.org/pci_security/standards_overview [last accessed June 16, 2022].Google Scholar
Osheroff v. Chestnut Lodge, Inc., 490 A. 2d 720, 62 Md. App. 519 (1985).Google Scholar
Consideration of the gestational carrier: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2018;100(6):1017–1021.Google Scholar
Lustgarten, SD, Garrison, YL, Sinnard, MT, Flynn, AWP. Digital privacy in mental healthcare: current issues and recommendations for technology use. Curr Opin Psychol 2020;36:25–31. https://doi.org/0.1016/j.copsyc.2020.03.012Google Scholar
Available at: www.hhs.gov/ocr/index.html [last accessed June 16, 2022].Google Scholar
2003, 2005, 2013. Available at: www.apaservices.org/practice/business/hipaa [last accessed June 16, 2022]; solely or in collaboration with the APA Insurance Trust (APA Practice Organization & APA Insurance Trust).Google Scholar
Yaqoob, T, Abbas, H, Atiquzzaman, M. Security vulnerabilities, attacks, countermeasures, and regulations of networked medical devices – a review. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor 2019;21:3723–3768; cited in Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021;18:9668. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18189668Google Scholar
The American Psychological Association. Record-keeping guidelines, Am Psychol 2007;62:993–1004.Google Scholar
References
Kass, LR. Babies by means of in vitro fertilization: unethical experiments on the unborn? N Engl J Med 1971;285(21):1174–1179.Google Scholar
King, LP. Should clinicians set limits on reproductive autonomy? Hastings Cent Rep 2017;47(Suppl. 3):S50–S56.Google Scholar
University of Minnesota’s Center for Bioethics. Ethics of Organ Transplantation. 2004. Available at: www.ahc.umn.edu/img/assets/26104/Organ_Transplantation.pdf [last accessed June 16, 2022].Google Scholar
Robertson, JA. Children of Choice: Freedom and the New Reproductive Technologies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994.Google Scholar
Steinbock, B. Review Essay/Procreative Liberty. Crim Justice Ethics 1996;15(1):67–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, JA. Ethics and the future of preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Reprod Biomed Online 2005;10(S1):97–101.Google Scholar
Robertson, JA. Genetic selection of offspring characteristics. B.U.L. Rev 1996;76(3):421–482.Google Scholar
Purdy, L. Children of choice: whose children? At what cost? Wash Lee Law Rev 1995;52(1):197–224.Google Scholar
Meilaender, G. Products of the will: Robertson’s children of choice. Wash Lee Law Rev 1995;52(1):173–195.Google Scholar
Sandel, MJ. The case against perfection: what’s wrong with designer children, bionic athletes, and genetic engineering. The Atlantic Online. Published April 2004. Available at: www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2004/04/the-case-against-perfection/302927/ [last accessed June 16, 2022].Google Scholar
Cohen, CB. Give me children or I shall die! New reproductive technologies and harm to children. Hastings Cent Rep 1996;40(4):19–27.Google Scholar
McDougall, R. Acting parentally: an argument against sex selection. J Med Ethics 2005;31:601–605.Google Scholar
Overall, C. Ethics and Human Reproduction: A Feminist Analysis. London: Routledge, 1987.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 390, December 2007. Ethical decision making in obstetrics and gynecology. Obstet Gynecol 2007;110(6):1479–1487. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000291573.09193.36Google Scholar
Parks, JA. Care ethics and the global practice of commercial surrogacy. Bioethics 2010;24(7):333–340.Google Scholar
Tam, H. Communitarianism, Sociology of. In: Wright, JD (editor-in-chief), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed., vol. 4. Oxford: Elsevier, 2015, 311–316.Google Scholar
Doyle, P. The U.K. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. How it has contributed to the evaluation of assisted reproduction technology. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1999;15(1):3–10.Google Scholar
What is SART? Available at: www.sart.org/patients/what-is-sart/ [last accessed June 16, 2022].Google Scholar
Weiner, C. Social responsibility in genetic engineering: historical perspectives. In: Nordgren, A. Gene Therapy and Ethics: Studies in Bioethics and Research Ethics, 4th ed. Uppsala, Sweden: Uppsala University Press, 1999, 51–64.Google Scholar
Timeline of Advances in the Field of Reproductive Medicine. Available at: www.asrm.org/about-us/history-of-asrm/ [last accessed June 16, 2022].Google Scholar