If your client signs it, you have entered into a sort of trust with them. Because it demonstrates a reduction in assumed immediate risk. (whether it is true or not does not matter.) You get done over failing to act to an immediate threat to life that was foreseeable. A contract of safety is evidence that the immediacy was greatly reduced. It is a brick in the wall of your defence should it arise. Judges don't expect you to be a psychic capable of mind reading and prophecy, at the end of the day.
I still say it's meaningless, legally, unless the judge chooses to see it as a sign that the therapist did their best. to be clear, I'm speaking of the united states system and we have a lot of loony judges. Some would also completely ignore the contract in a civil case, if they were the type that would let a lawsuit like this (family suing the therapist) go through.
If they don't sign then they are viewed at immediate risk. At which point you are obligated by law and protocol.
This is why it's completely counterproductive to the process of dealing with the suicidal thoughts of a patient who wants to seek help.
The grey area is it is all a judgement call with no certainty and grim ramifications for getting it wrong.
Exactly. It's a grey area which means that the fake-contract is pretty pointless, legally speaking. A judge who let's a civil case like this go through by letting a therapist get sued is already ignoring the fact that the client came to him/her. The judge who looks at the contract as evidence that the therapist tried is already the judge who is not letting that case go to court to begin with b/c of all the other evidence.
I could also explain how you can whip up a contract in 3 minutes drawn in crayon and have it exist on napkins and still count as valid if it meets the criteria. But I have run out of energy.
No need. It's the same situation. If the judge is a loony he's going to take a cocktail napkin that says "a movie about a war in the stars" and give the plaintiff a billion dollars of George Lucas' money.
Most judges will look at that same napkin and laugh at the plaintiff. Your exception is not the rule, it is a rarity that you think is more common because when it happens, it's news (
because of the rarity).
I just want to be clear in case it didn't come through before: If you (people on this forum) want help from a therapist you should seek them out and I've known many good ones. I've also known a lot of terrible ones, though, who are either ineffective or abusive (intentionally or unintentionally).
Understand that part of getting help is finding the right therapist, and shopping around. You're not looking for someone who agrees with you all the time (and you won't find that) but someone who respects you and validates your feelings even as they challenge you and are honest with you. You should be willing to work but part of that is making sure you have a therapist who works.
If a suicide contract makes you feel like trust is being affected, this means telling the therapist and letting the chips fall, and maybe finding another. If the suicide contract doesn't make you uncomfortable
and you're being honest in signing it then that's fine too.
You are all equally valuable as human beings and your feelings are important and valid. You have a right to find the best therapist for you
if you want help. Believe it.
