[Redway]

No but who’s ever been told something in confidence but then forgot it was confidential and then accidentally talked when you shouldn’t have?

[Beso]

I usually forget by morning time.

[Alf]

Youtube video

[bots]

Originally Posted by Alf

Youtube video

you are adding too much of the url Alf, you only need wtc4f7Ez7FA in this case

[joeysteele]

Anyone telling me something in confidence that they asked not to be repeated to anyone else.
Then that would be like a locked box in my brain.
I'd never mention it to anyone at all.

[Redway]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Anyone telling me something in confidence that they asked not to be repeated to anyone else.
Then that would be like a locked box in my brain.
I'd never mention it to anyone at all.

I like the way you think. I wouldn’t be telling my wife things that someone else who’s nothing to do with her (I’m not married but you catch my drift) told me in strict confidence. Maybe it would be different if I’d been married for 15 years but from where I’m sitting I don’t think betraying someone’s trust like that is a good idea, even if it goes no further. If you don’t need to know, you don’t need to know.

[thesheriff443]

Have you heard the saying
A drunk person speaks a sober person’s mind

Sometimes when people are drunk they talk and say things they wouldn’t when sober, hence talking about someone

Also information comes out when a person is angry

[Redway]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

Have you heard the saying
A drunk person speaks a sober person’s mind

Sometimes when people are drunk they talk and say things they wouldn’t when sober, hence talking about someone

Also information comes out when a person is angry

Information definitely does come out when angry and that’s something we could probably all do with working on. When a friend asks you something in earnest, it’s better to at least try and be honest (as tempting as it is to just lie through your teeth when the truth isn’t something they want to hear) rather than waiting for the moment for an angry argument to erupt before they tell you what they really think.

Alcohol’s (as for that) one hell of a drug. It makes people say all sorts.

[Oliver_W]

I can't keep anything you tell me secret if it involves yourself or others breaking the law or being endangered

[Redway]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

I can't keep anything you tell me secret if it involves yourself or others breaking the law or being endangered

Technically getting drunk in a pub is against the law. You have a choice. You absolutely have a choice, lad.

[user104658]

I'd also point out that I'm talking about 20-year-plus relationships here not a boyfriend or girlfriend met in a club last November. There is a HUGE difference that, respectfully, people who haven't spent a very large chunk of their life with someone will not fully appreciate.

[Livia]

I like to think I'm good at keeping confidences. I don't share secrets that are not mine to share. That said, I don't like gossipy secrets about a third person. I try to make it clear that if I'm told a secret about someone else, I'll tell everyone, and also say where I heard it from.

[bots]

Having worked for a couple of companies that dealt with information that ranged from restricted through confidential, secret, top secret and higher. Each level has a very clear definition and confidential is very much at the lower end of the scale. Confidential information actually has a pretty wide distribution

[user104658]

You're deifying and idealising Redway; Samaritans is a voluntary sector organisation with no formal qualification requirements, and whilst some working for Samaritans are no doubt extremely good people and extremely good at what they do, you're attributing a pedestal-like flawlessness to other Samaritans that's frankly unrealistic and that I know to be factually simply incorrect; some people have a terrible experience with Samaritans. Like I said before, largely better (in terms of morals) than NHS crisis lines (which is shocking in itself to be able to say) but ultimately the idea that it's staffed entirely by irreproachable angels is just silly, and can actually be dangerous?

I also didn't suggest a blanket policy that everyone should talk to their spouses as a rule of thumb.

In the end we're all making a trust-based judgement call, and the bare-bones fact is, something I share with my wife (again, not people's personal details, not breaking GDPR etc. or any conduct rules), both because of how well I know her as a person and the trust within a relationship like that, goes no further, and I trust it 100x more than I trust any coworker, anywhere, in any organisation with that information. Like I said if you take away the impeccable deifying of Samaritans workers (which is a fantasy) you are also ultimately putting it down entirely to trust. You aren't telling anyone external - and you're trusting them not to tell anyone external. You do not and can not know that they won't. It's a trust... a belief. It's not a fact. It can only ever be so. We can't ever fully know another person. But honestly Redway - I'm pretty sure I can confide in my partner of 20 years, who is also a highly intelligent professional, with more trust than I'd give to Betty my random coworker at Samaritans just because Betty's watched a few informal training videos and seems like a nice lady. You don't know them. No vetting process is without flaws. There's an unreasonable reverence for Samaritans here, and I'm sure you have your reasons for that, too. But also perhaps something to ponder.

[bots]

Samaritans are under no legal obligation to maintain confidentiality. That is a simple fact. On that basis, it's pretty much like sending a postcard. People may read it, or they may not

[user104658]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

Samaritans are under no legal obligation to maintain confidentiality. That is a simple fact. On that basis, it's pretty much like sending a postcard. People may read it, or they may not

Ultimately everything is if you remove identifiability and obfuscate details - e.g. medical professionals will (in fact have to) use real cases for things like revalidation of professional registration and education/training.Names and details will be removed and changed to make sure no one could possibly know who it's about, but the details of what happened/what was done will be accurate and someone's "real story".

If you want to take it to the most philosophical level - confidentiality is about the person not about the situation. If you can't link a description of a situation to any individual in any way, then confidentiality hasn't been broken.

Medical and mental health training would be literally impossible otherwise, or if you had to have people sign off consent on their situation being used as a training example, especially in mental health. Most people simply will not, and hypothetical scenarios are much less useful than real-world examples.

[Redway]

Why are you an ex-soldier anyhow? Break military confidentiality out of quantum-mechanical curiosity?

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Redway

Why are you an ex-soldier anyhow? Break military confidentiality out of quantum-mechanical curiosity?

I've never been a soldier of any description (other than a toy one) and that is, funnily enough, ultimately why I decided (after joking about it) that I probably should change it.

[Redway]

Originally Posted by Quantum Boy

I've never been a soldier of any description (other than a toy one) and that is, funnily enough, ultimately why I decided (after joking about it) that I probably should change it.

I think the fact that I was toying wit. ya may have been missed.