RESUMEN
Objectives: The present explorative study evaluates the question of media regulation in treatment and the question of psychoanalysts' experiences with digital crossings of boundaries. Methods: Using a self-constructed questionnaire, N = 50 completed questionnaires were distributed to psychoanalysts (age: M = 48,64, SD = 12,71; m = 44 %, f = 56 %) at the 51st IPA Congress held in July 2019 that were analyzed using aMann-Whitney U-test and Chi square test. Results: The majority of the psychoanalysts surveyed 68 %, (n = 34) do not regularly discuss the use ofmedia with their patients at the beginning of treatment, 28%(n = 14) of the analysts surveyed contacted their patients using digital media services without discussing this possibility of contact beforehand, 16 % (n = 8) contacted their patients at night, 46 %, n = 23 googled their patients and 24 %, (n = 12) secretly used a mobile phone during analysis. Conclusions: Due to the advancing technology of the health care system, further psychoanalytic research that accompanies the process of using media in treatment is necessary.
Asunto(s)
Internet , Psicoanálisis , Humanos , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The media are an important source of information on mental health. They are often implicit in reinforcing negative stereotypes of people with mental health problems. There are no studies in German-speaking countries or Russia on media attitudes to mental health and mental health professionals' (MHP) attitudes to the media. AIMS: This study explored journalists and MHPs attitudes to mental health media reporting in the German speaking countries of Switzerland, Germany, and Austria and in Russia. METHODS: A cross-sectional online internet survey, of ten Likert scale statements to ascertain perceptions of stigma, role, and training needs following the STROBE guidance was conducted among journalists and MHPs via their professional organizations. A non-discriminatory exponential snowballing technique leading to non-probability sampling was used. Descriptive statistics, Kruskal-Wallis, and a post hoc Dunn's multiple comparisons test using Bonferroni adjustment were used to analyze data. RESULTS: A total of 106 German-speaking and 78 Russian journalists, 109 German-speaking, and 82 Russian MHPs fully answered the survey. Journalists felt the media were more balanced about mental health than MHPs, and MHPs were wary of engagement with the media. Small minorities of journalists had engaged with mental health training, similarly few MHPs had engaged with media training, but both groups were interested in doing so in the future. Significant differences between German and Russian speaking respondents were found on a range of issues (e.g. stigmatization, image about psychotherapy, the media/MHPs, and their own role in engaging with the media/MHPs). Russians were more likely to know specialized (media/mental health awareness) training compared to German-speaking MHPs and journalists. CONCLUSION: There are potential opportunities to engage journalists and MHPs in training about each other's worlds and reducing stigma toward mental illness through engaging MHPs with the media.