confidentiality (countable and uncountable, plural confidentialities)

1. (uncountable) The property of being confidential.

2. (countable) Something told in confidence; a secret.

As a priest, I get confidentiality. I respect not only those things told to me in confidence, but the person doing the telling. I understand the issues and the fear and how unconfident a person can be in sharing.

Confidentiality allows some freedom of expression. This is why we go to it. This is why we find the person we feel most comfortable with and we tell them what is on our minds. We share, and we open ourselves up. We do this because we are confident in our relationship; we trust them. We want to feel safe.

But

Poor use of confidentiality can also be dangerous and the wrong avenue for healthy conversation. And worse, it is often used to manipulate people and can become a cancer to a whole organization.

Confidentiality is confessional by nature.  That freedom and opening up that we celebrate, which allows us to be vulnerable, is not just about the things being said; it is about the person herself. When a person speaks in confidence, it isn’t a place of conversation or dialogue. It is a place of confessing that there is a problem but with the hope that a solution may be discovered.

Confidentiality is for a personal problem, however. This is not the place for solving a group’s problems. Institutional problems aren’t solved in the confessional booth. Or the parking lot. Or the living room.

If one’s problem is with the group, there is certainly a place for speaking in confidence, but only to fix their problem with the group.

If it has to do with the group, then you are not claiming it as your own problem. You are claiming it is the group’s problem. This isn’t confessional and not suited for confidential speaking. This is about us. We need to deal with us together.

Therefore, confidentiality cannot be expected when the group is the subject.

There are circumstances in which we begin in confidence and move to public. The most challenging example comes in those matters of systemic abuse, in which verbal, emotional, or sexual abuse creates a personal problem that can affect multiple people, becoming a public problem.

Our Choices

Because it is often hard to tell the difference between what should remain personal and what should be public, we so often err on the side of confidentiality. This instinct is good, for the most part. Here’s what we need to look for.

Are you in a position of power and are they coming to simply tell you how they feel?
Not a problem.

Do they expect you to do anything about it?
If yes, then that’s a problem.

Why?
Several reasons. Chances are that the issue is not something you alone are responsible for. Chances are that the issue is brought to you as a personal feeling, but they are seeking a public response, which does not make it personal. Chances are they are putting you in the middle of their conflict, shifting ownership from them to you.

 

When someone comes to you in confidence, is there an expectation of ongoing dialogue with you?
If yes, this can be a valuable and rewarding experience.

Are they trying to avoid speaking to someone else?
If yes, then you are being triangulated. They may be seeking to shift ownership of the problem to you.

Do they maintain ownership of their problem?
If yes, then confidence is appropriate. If no, then a new arrangement must be made.

 

Do they come to you for your response for things they do not understand?
If you are able to provide assistance, then great! Everyone is happy! You are able to be a personal connection to them.

Do they then go and tell someone else or seek a different response from a second party but want to retain confidence with you?
Sounds like trouble. And worse, this twists the very idea of confidentiality, turning a personal connection into a type of triangle. This is not OK.

From Personal to Public

Notice how easily a personal feeling is transformed into a public expectation? If you are unsure of why this is a problem, I suggest you seek out further reading by Edwin Friedman or Peter Steinke, who illustrate the problems with triangulation in what is called Family Systems Theory.

My own test is to look at who owns the problem and what the owner wants to do with it.

If they come to you and the problem is entirely about them and their experience and they are looking for some help in dealing with with their problem, then the anonymity of speaking in confidence can be a valuable resource in helping them solve their problem. Examples of this are people with marital struggles or looking for help with alcohol or narcotics abuse. It may even include those coming forward to speak of abuse they are receiving. This, however, will elicit a notification of proper civic authorities, making permanent confidentiality impossible.

If they are bringing a problem to you so that you can deal with it, then they are no longer owning the problem as theirs, but trying to make it yours. This is often how church members come forward with concerns about the music or finances, for example. This is a public concern, not a personal one. Often, fears of retribution or discrimination falsely prevent us from bringing these things forward. In cases of actual systemic abuse, then confidentiality isn’t what we should worry about, it is the abuse!

Many of the people that come to me with what they think is a personal problem, are unable to tell the difference. Particularly when it is couched as personal. I don’t think I can stay where this goes on. or He’s offending me, so he needs to be talked to. or I don’t like that kind of music; we need to play different hymns. None of these is personal. They deal with personal taste or experience, but they all demand action from someone other than the person and involves even more people. That isn’t a personal problem.

I’m all about asking for help. If you have a problem and I can help, I will gladly be there.

It’s just that I’m not your problem-solver or your burden-carrier. And neither are you for someone else. If it really is a problem for you, then you wouldn’t mind owning it.