Never do this young therapist. Never.

Yesterday I wrote about an adoption agency that posted photos and protected health information about children who were in a disrupted adoption (their adoptive parents were going to sign them away to another parent because things didn't work out). Through the efforts of many individuals, Wasatch International Adoptions was pressured to take the information down.

I found the blog of the Wasatch International Adoptions.

We use the internet to post a story about the child, using a false name, but using real photos. Our Second Chance Facebook site has over 10,000 members, and when we post a child, there are 10’s of 1000’s of cross posts. Our administrative page shows that we often have 100,000 or more people view the post! It has been as high as 300,000 views of a child.

I'm just floored that a licensed social worker would appear to have such little understanding and knowledge of the ethical codes and laws which govern their practice. Maybe I'm being generous in my assessment. Perhaps these licensed social workers are wantonly ignoring the expectations of privacy that the ethical codes of Social Workers demand.

Licensed therapists don't show real photos and real stories about their clients. There is no excuse for this. There is no reason for this to happen. Ever. There is absolutely no reason to display a client's picture and personal story to 10,000 facebook members, who cross post that information 10s of 1000s of times, making a child and their personal experiences displayed to 300,000 strangers.

How would you feel if your therapist told everyone in the city of Anchorage Alaska (population 298,610) or Pittsburgh Pennsylvania (population 305,704) about what you talked about in therapy last week? What would it feel like if the population of Valladolid Spain (312,434) knew that your mother sexually abused you? Would you be comfortable if I told the everyone in Suncheon South Korea (population 304,528) that you had problems with inappropriate masturbation?

This is just the kind of information that this adoption agency displayed on the internet--intentionally displayed on the internet--and acted as if it was ethical, legal, and the right thing. The agency felt that because they had a release of information from the parents of the children (parents who want to abandon their adoptive children), they had discharged their ethical duty to protect their patients privacy, dignity, and confidentiality.

Never do this young therapist. Never. 

Children For Sale: Get 'Em While They're Hot

Through Yahoo and Facebook groups, parents and others advertise their unwanted children and then pass them to strangers with little or no government scrutiny, sometimes illegally, a Reuters investigation has found. It is a largely lawless marketplace. Often, the children are treated as chattel, and the needs of parents are put ahead of the welfare of the orphans they brought to America. The practice is called "private re-homing," a term typically used by owners seeking new homes for their pets. [read more here]

Imagine that. Adopting a child and for whatever reason--lack of skill, planning, or resources--choosing to give that child up. What a horrible decision to have to make. I'd like to think parents agonize, soul search, and try their hardest to make it work. I'd like to think that parents marshall their resources, get help, and keep to their commitment to raise, love, and nurture their adopted child.

Based on the Reuters article, it appears this is not always what happens.

Yesterday I was made aware of one particular organization that helps "rehome" adopted children. This organization, Wasatch International Adoptions, has a program called Second Chance Adoptions. They have a Facebook page where they have pictures and information about children who are being shopped for new parents.

I was aghast at their Facebook page. The descriptions of the children, attached to their pictures, includes what appears to be protected health information about psychiatric treatment, developmental disabilities, experiences of sexual and physical abuse, and physical conditions. (n.b. since the time this blog post was initially posted, the adoption agency removed their Facebook page and later put it back up with edited information that disclosed significantly less personal information).

In exchange for $950 a year the organization offers, among other things, to "post a picture and a profile of your child on Rainbow Kids, other disruption blogs and websites, and also on our own website."

"In order for WIA to post your child’s picture you must provide a detailed profile with information about your child and also sign a release of confidentiality allowing WIA to share this information with any family who contacts us about your child." 

I understand that a prospective adoptive family would need to have access to all of a child's protected health information. I don't dispute that. I do dispute whether information like this should be made available to anyone who looks at a Facebook page.

What right do I have to know that there is a seven year old girl who has experienced sexual trauma and beats up her baby dolls? Should I know about the six year old boy who sometimes acts out in sexualized ways? How about a 15 year old girl? Should I be reading about her residential treatment, developmental disabilities, and her diagnosis of reactive attachment disorder?

Is this disclosure of information ethical? I thought it might be helpful to sort through this ethical dilemma in a public forum. 

I'm not a social worker. I'm a licensed psychologist and health service provider in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I'm obligated to think this through by the ethical codes, guidelines, and laws that I am responsible for following. Laws and ethics for social workers in general, and social workers in Utah specifically, might be different.