Skip to main content
MedVellum
QuestionsVideosPricing

MedVellum

Fellowship exam preparation across every specialty: source-verified topics, questions in every format, and videos.

Product

  • Specialties
  • Questions
  • Videos
  • Exam tools
  • Pricing

Verification & policy

  • Verified register
  • Editorial policy
  • Privacy
  • Terms

Account

  • Sign in
  • Create account
  • Dashboard
  • Account & billing

© 2026 MedVellum. For education only — not a substitute for clinical judgement.

llms.txtPsychiatry LLM catalogSitemap

Paeds SAQsprofessional-practice-and-evidence

Paeds SAQs · professional-practice-and-evidence

Confidentiality with children and adolescents — formative SAQs

Two formative short-answer questions on conditional confidentiality, Gillick/Fraser capacity, the three override thresholds, parental requests for information and electronic-record breaches.

20 marks30 min3 min readVerification in progress

Target exams

RACP General PaediatricsRACP DWERACP DCEMRCPCH TheoryMRCPCH ClinicalABP General Pediatrics
On this page
Study tools

Target exams

RACP General PaediatricsRACP DWERACP DCEMRCPCH TheoryMRCPCH ClinicalABP General Pediatrics
Prompt
Confidentiality with children and adolescents

SAQ 1 — The conditional script and the override (10 marks)

A 15-year-old attends alone for the first time, having previously been brought by a parent. They open with: "If I tell you something, will you tell my parents?" Later in the visit they disclose two weeks of low mood, intermittent self-harm by scratching, and passive thoughts that life is not worth living, but no active plan or intent. [2] [6]

Questions

  1. Give the conditional-confidentiality statement you would deliver at the start, and explain why it is preferred to a promise of absolute secrecy. (4 marks) [1] [6]
  2. Outline your immediate assessment and management of the low-mood and self-harm disclosure, including the threshold for overriding confidentiality. (4 marks) [6] [8]
  3. Explain how you would assess this young person's capacity under the Gillick or Fraser framework, and why capacity is described as decision-specific. (2 marks) [9]

Model answer

Conditional script and why absolute secrecy fails (4). A workable script: "What we talk about is private, between us, unless I'm worried you're at serious risk of being hurt, of hurting yourself, or of hurting someone else, or unless the law requires me to share something. If I ever do need to share, I'll tell you first and we'll plan it together." This is preferred because absolute secrecy cannot be kept — an inevitable override (serious harm, abuse, legal duty) would make the original promise a lie and collapse trust. Conditional framing lets the clinician honour the promise actually made. [2] [1] [6]

Assessment and management of the disclosure (4). Assess suicide risk directly: ideation, plan, intent, means, prior attempts, protective factors and capacity to stay safe. Passive thoughts without active plan or intent, with intermittent superficial self-harm and intact protective factors, may be managed with early close follow-up, a safety plan and connection to psychological support. Active plan or intent triggers the serious-harm override: secure immediate safety, share minimum necessary with crisis team and parent as part of the safety plan, tell the young person what is shared and why. Do not file-and-forget or rely on delayed psychology alone if risk is high. [6] [8]

Capacity assessment (2). Gillick/Fraser asks whether the young person understands the condition, the proposed care, the alternatives and the risks, and can weigh that information rationally and hold it in mind. Capacity is decision-specific because competence for one decision (e.g. engaging with psychological support) does not establish competence for a different or higher-stakes decision (e.g. refusing life-saving treatment), and it can fluctuate with illness and distress. [9]

Paediatrics Fellowship Pro

Continue reading

You have read the opening of this SAQ. The complete unit — every section and its primary-source references — is part of the Paediatrics Fellowship fellowship library.

Sign in to continueSee pricing
References8ShowHide
  1. [1]Chung RJ, Lee JB, Alderman EM, et al Confidentiality in the Care of Adolescents: Policy Statement. Pediatrics, 2024.PMID 38646690
  2. [2]Ford CA, Millstein SG Delivery of confidentiality assurances to adolescents by primary care physicians. Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine, 1997.PMID 9158445
  3. [3]Miller VA, Friedrich E, García-España JF, et al. Adolescents Spending Time Alone With Pediatricians During Routine Visits: Perspectives of Parents in a Primary Care Clinic. The Journal of adolescent health, 2018.PMID 29887486
  4. [4]Pasternak RH, Alderman EM, English A 21st Century Cures Act ONC Rule: Implications for Adolescent Care and Confidentiality Protections. Pediatrics, 2023.PMID 37010402
  5. [5]McKay EA, Brar P, Mehus CJ, et al. Parents' Perspectives on Confidentiality in Clinical Preventive Services for Adolescents. The Journal of adolescent health, 2025.PMID 40580168
  6. [6]Berlan ED, Bravender T Confidentiality, consent, and caring for the adolescent patient. Current opinion in pediatrics, 2009.PMID 19474734
  7. [8]American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Confidentiality in Adolescent Health Care: ACOG Committee Opinion, Number 803. Obstetrics and gynecology, 2020.PMID 32217979
  8. [9]Larcher V, Hutchinson A How should paediatricians assess Gillick competence? Archives of disease in childhood, 2010.PMID 19948515
Paediatrics Fellowship Pro

$29/ monthor $279 / year

The complete Paediatrics Fellowship library, every exam format, one subscription.

  • Complete library for one chosen specialty
  • Timed MCQ mock exams and spaced review
  • Clinical cases & cross-table vivas
See pricingSign in
PreviousCommunicating risk and uncertainty to families — formative SAQsprofessional-practice-and-evidenceNextConflict, complaints and difficult clinical encounters — formative SAQsprofessional-practice-and-evidence