• Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    That drug use thing is a massive stretch of the words “cause harm to yourself or others”. That clause is - to my knowledge - used exclusively to mean things like abuse, assault, murder, or suicide.

    Please provide a source of that actually happening or a legislative or judicial ruling that supports that idea at all.

    And really? Most of the Lutheran church specifically agrees with breaching the seal of confessional, and specifically supports mandated reporting.

    While there is some support for absolute secrecy of a private confession, Lutheran history and the Book of Concord do not support the concept of keeping a confidence if it risks the ongoing abuse or death of a child or requires the pastor to violate civil or criminal laws designed to protect children from abuse.

    While Scripture discourages gossiping and speech designed to damage the reputation of another, keeping a confidence “is not an absolute, especially when others are being harmed or may be hurt."

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      That drug use thing is a massive stretch of the words “cause harm to yourself or others”. That clause is - to my knowledge - used exclusively to mean things like abuse, assault, murder, or suicide.

      Did some further googling and it appears that what I remember might apply to a) school councillors and the like, and b) law enforcement getting reports about type of treatment after they dropped someone off. Why law enforcement is doing EMT stuff is of course yet a whole another topic.

      While Scripture discourages gossiping and speech designed to damage the reputation of another, keeping a confidence “is not an absolute, especially when others are being harmed or may be hurt.

      And that’s exactly how German law sees it: Breaking confidence is permitted in certain cases, but not mandated. On the flipside, if you’re e.g. a cop or a child care worker, when you see certain things you are required to pursue them, that’s different in e.g. the Netherlands where cops are free to ignore you if you light up a joint in front of them, and tell them about it, and don’t even hide it in a brown bag. People taking confessions including therapists are neither of those, though, so they do not have that kind of duty.

      Law will never be able to cover, in detail, the balancing process necessary to actually reduce harm in any specific case. It is a very blunt instrument.

      You’re exchanging one absolute for another. The original absolute btw, not being that absolute because catholic priests can tattle anonymously (if the state allows for such things, different topic), and then themselves confess. But it should never be a “hear X, do Y” kind of deal. That doesn’t serve the situation.