Friday, 14 November 2025

Critical Analysis: Navigating the Ethical Labyrinth of Peer Support ( Cynthia kana. Blog 2)

 

Critical Analysis: Navigating the Ethical Labyrinth of Peer Support.

Cynthia kana. Blog 2.

 

On a more profound level of analysis, the peer-support dynamic presented a complex ethical dilemma: the inherent contradiction between the obligation of friendship and the emergence of professional responsibility. According to Aveyard (2015), critical thinking in health and social care requires us to be able to question not only evidence but also the morality of our actions. In this regard, the dilemma was determined by the concepts of biomedical ethics (Beauchamp & Childress, 2019): beneficence, non-maleficence, and autonomy.

The primary critical challenge was establishing and maintaining boundaries. The friend’s increasing reliance created a situation where autonomy (their right to make choices, including choices about seeking professional help) was potentially being undermined by an overly directive approach stemming from a misplaced sense of beneficence (the desire to ‘do good’ by controlling the narrative). The thoughtful practitioner, even in a non-professional capacity, must critically assess the risk of non-maleficence violation, the potential harm caused by over-involvement or offering unqualified advice. A lack of professional training meant that advice offered was often anecdotal rather than evidence-based, a practice that online blogs from professionals frequently warn against (The Guardian Social Care Network Blog, 2025).

A significant area for critical thought involved unpacking the inherent assumptions about mental health support. The initial, culturally ingrained assumption was often that 'talking cures all' or that 'tough love' was necessary. Critical thinking mandates that these deeply held beliefs be subjected to rigorous scrutiny (The Foundation for Critical Thinking website for Students and Professionals, 2025). Through self-enquiry and research (The Nursing Times Journal, 2025), this practitioner learned to replace these assumptions with two critical frameworks:

The Biopsychosocial Model

Recognising that distress is multi-faceted and cannot be resolved by one person or one conversation alone (Wade & Halligan, 2017).

Biopsychosocial model - Wikipedia

Figure 3: Biopsychosocial Model (Wade & Halligan, 2017)

The Principle of Signposting

A professional and ethical obligation to direct the individual towards appropriate, qualified help (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), 2019).

The ethical tightrope walk also involved balancing confidentiality with the duty of care. While the friend’s disclosures were made under the implicit seal of friendship, critical thinking required evaluating the risk of harm. The moment distress escalated to expressions of hopelessness, the uncritical assumption of ‘keeping secrets’ was challenged by the ethical need to ensure safety. This is a crucial area of learning for any future HSC professional: the thoughtful practitioner must recognise that personal loyalty is secondary to the duty of care when immediate safety is compromised. Fook (2012) suggests that it is in these moments of ethical discomfort that critical reflection is most potent, forcing us to integrate our personal values with emerging professional standards. The decision to involve a trusted family member, against the friend’s initial wishes, was an action taken not from a place of judgment, but from a position of critical evaluation of the risk to non-maleficence.

The emotional toll on the supporter must also be critically analysed. Compassion fatigue, the emotional and physical exhaustion caused by prolonged exposure to another's trauma or distress, is a real phenomenon even in peer support (Najjar et al., 2017). The failure to implement reflective self-care mechanisms early on, a professional failing projected onto a personal situation, led to a period of burnout for the supporter. Without critically examining one’s own well-being, the ability to provide practical, unbiased support diminishes significantly (KCL Social Care Workforce Blog, 2025).

5 comments:

  1. It emphasizes efficient application of theoretical frameworks, especially biomedical ethics and Biopsychosocial Model, in the process of relating personal contemplation with professional standards. The boundaries, autonomy, and compassion fatigue exploration, as well as contemporary evidence use, can be considered strengths. As the summary can give, the work may be improved by the introduction of structural or cultural factors that affect ethical decision-making.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jose thankyou for your comment, it was a great experience to learning about blogging

    ReplyDelete
  3. Cynthia your reflection demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the ethical challenges in peer support, especially the balance between confidentiality and duty of care. The decision to involve a trusted family member is well justified through the principle of non-maleficence, and your integration of Fooks perspective adds depth to the analysis.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Melanie by comment this blog, you are given me courage to achieved and finish the blog. thankyou

    ReplyDelete
  5. cynthia the aim of your reflection was to explore ethical challenges related to the duty of confidentiality.

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Ethical Issues for Online Health & Social Care Bloggers

Ethical Issues for Online Health & Social Care Bloggers   Blog Entry 4: Omozee Ugiagbe (Group 4) Introduction Professional communication...