| Course | NU 673 Psychiatric Mental Healthcare I |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 4 |
| Paper type | Adolescent consent and confidentiality brief |
| Length | About 800 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Herzing University |
| Program | MSN Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse Practitioner |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NU 673 Unit 4
Consent and Confidentiality Brief for a 16-Year-Old in Outpatient Treatment for Depression and Self-Harm: Who Consents, What Stays Private, and What Is Shared
Student Name
Department of Nursing, Herzing University
NU 673: Psychiatric Mental Healthcare I
Instructor Name
February 13, 2026
Consent and Confidentiality Brief for a 16-Year-Old in Outpatient Treatment for Depression and Self-Harm: Who Consents, What Stays Private, and What Is Shared
Setting and Arrangement
Jordan is a composite 16-year-old, who uses they/them pronouns, seen in an outpatient psychiatric clinic for depression and a six-month history of cutting their forearms, most recently three weeks ago. They live with their mother, who has legal custody, and were referred by their pediatrician. This brief describes the arrangement under which Jordan is treated. Minor consent laws differ considerably among states; the arrangement below follows the law of the composite state in which the clinic operates, in which minors aged 14 and older may consent on their own to outpatient counseling, but parental consent is required for prescription medication. The clinic's legal counsel confirmed these rules for this state; a clinician elsewhere must check their own.
Consent and Assent, as Obtained
Counseling: Jordan consented to outpatient therapy themselves, which the state permits at 16. Their mother was informed, with Jordan's agreement, and supports it.
Medication: after two sessions, sertraline was recommended. Jordan's mother gave written consent after a discussion that included the boxed warning about increased suicidal thinking in young people during the early weeks of antidepressant treatment and the plan for weekly visits during that period. Jordan gave assent, meaning agreement in their own words after the same explanation: "I want to try it. I know I need to tell someone if it gets worse." Both consent and assent are recorded, with what was explained.
What Jordan Was Told About Privacy
At the first session, before Jordan said anything personal, they were told: "What you tell me stays between us, with a few important exceptions. If I'm worried that you are in serious danger of hurting yourself or someone else, or that someone is hurting you, I'll need to share that to keep you safe, and I'll tell you before I do whenever I can. Other than that, I won't share details with your mom without your okay. I'll let her know you're coming and give general updates about how things are going, and we can decide together what else she hears." Jordan was asked to repeat the exceptions back and did. Adolescents are more willing to disclose sensitive information and return for care when they are assured of confidentiality (Ford et al., 1997), and professional guidance supports confidential care for adolescents within clear limits (Ford et al., 2004).
What Jordan's Mother May Be Told
Because Jordan consented to counseling on their own under state law, federal privacy rules generally treat Jordan, not the parent, as the person who controls access to information about that care, with parents' access depending on state law and the clinician's judgment (Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information, 2025, § 164.502). For medication, which the mother consented to, she is entitled to information about the medication, its effects, and monitoring.
In practice: the mother is told whether Jordan attends, whether the medication is being taken and tolerated, and whether there are safety concerns. She is not told the content of therapy sessions, such as what Jordan said about friends, relationships, or identity, unless Jordan agrees. Safety concerns are always shared: if Jordan's self-harm becomes more frequent or severe, or if they have thoughts of suicide with a plan, the mother will be informed and involved in the safety plan.
When Someone Asks for Information
From the mother, by phone, asking what Jordan talks about: "I can tell you that Jordan is coming regularly and working hard. What we talk about stays between us unless Jordan wants to share it or I'm worried about safety, and right now I'm not. Would it help to have a family session where Jordan decides what to talk about?"
From the school counselor, asking whether Jordan is in treatment: nothing is disclosed without a written authorization signed by Jordan, and for medication-related information, also by the mother. If Jordan wants the school involved, for example to arrange a quiet place during panic, the authorization will be limited to that purpose.
From the pediatrician, for coordination: information needed for treatment may be shared between treating clinicians, but Jordan was asked first and agreed that the pediatrician may know the diagnosis and medication, not session content.
The Hardest Case, Planned in Advance
If Jordan discloses cutting that is more frequent, deeper, or accompanied by thoughts of suicide, the plan is to tell Jordan first that their mother must be told, invite Jordan to be present or to tell her themselves with support, and then inform the mother the same day. This preserves as much of Jordan's trust as safety allows, and it was described to Jordan at the start, so it will not come as a betrayal.
References
Ford, C. A., Millstein, S. G., Halpern-Felsher, B. L., & Irwin, C. E., Jr. (1997). Influence of physician confidentiality assurances on adolescents' willingness to disclose information and seek future health care: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 278(12), 1029-1034. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1997.03550120089044
Ford, C., English, A., & Sigman, G. (2004). Confidential health care for adolescents: Position paper of the Society for Adolescent Medicine. Journal of Adolescent Health, 35(2), 160-167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2004.03.002
Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information, 45 C.F.R. § 164.502 (2025).
The Herzing NU 673 Unit 4 instructions
Unit 4 asks you to analyze consent and confidentiality for a minor in mental health treatment. Expect to describe the arrangement, explain who consented to which services under state law, record what the adolescent was told about privacy, describe what parents and others may be told and plan for safety situations that require disclosure. Many versions ask whether you can simply state the consent age; you should also explain what it covers. Check whether your section expects a specific state's law. Federal privacy rules interact with state minor consent laws, so explain how. Script what you would say to the adolescent and to a parent who asks. Plan the hardest case in advance, so the limits of confidentiality are clear before a crisis.
How this NU 673 Unit 4 example is built
The brief opens with the setting and arrangement, naming the services and who consented to each. The consent section separates counseling, which Jordan consented to alone, from medication, which needed a parent. The privacy section quotes what Jordan was told in the first session, which shows confidentiality limits were explained before any disclosure. The parent section explains what the mother may and may not be told and why. The requests section scripts responses to the mother and to the school. The hardest case section sets out in advance what would lead to disclosure and how it would be done with Jordan's involvement. The brief uses they/them for Jordan throughout, consistent with the patient's pronouns.
Where the points sit in the NU 673 Unit 4 rubric
Herzing's rubric for a consent and confidentiality brief typically covers accuracy of consent law, the explanation of privacy to the adolescent, rules for disclosure to parents and others, safety planning, communication and writing. Accuracy is checked closely, since minor consent laws vary and interact with federal privacy rules. Privacy explanation points reward plain wording given before disclosure. Disclosure criteria look for clear limits on what parents and schools may receive. Safety planning earns credit when the threshold for breaking confidentiality is defined in advance. Communication points go to scripted, respectful responses. The HIPAA privacy rule and Ford's 2004 position paper belong in the APA 7 list.
NU 673 Unit 4 help before you submit
Consent briefs in Unit 4 commonly lose points by stating the consent age without explaining what services it covers. Another frequent problem is promising complete confidentiality, which the clinician cannot keep in a safety crisis. Students often confuse what a parent can be told about counseling with what they can be told about medication. School requests are handled without a release. Safety thresholds are vague, such as if the teen is at risk. Responses to parents are not scripted. The patient's pronouns are ignored. Finally, plan the hardest case before it happens, because graders reward a brief that sets the limits clearly with the adolescent at the start.
Get a NU 673 Unit 4 example written to your instructions
Send the Unit 4 instructions and the rubric from your NU 673 classroom, and say which state and setting the brief should assume. We write a custom example that separates consent from assent, quotes what the young person was told, describes parental information by category and routes school contact through a named authorization. First custom sample free, delivered within 24 to 48 hours.
More NU 673 papers and PMHNP samples
- NU 673 Unit 1: Presenting problem profile
- NU 673 Unit 2: Community resource pathway
- NU 673 Unit 3: Psychoeducation session outline
- NU 673 Unit 5: Medication and cognition review
- NU 673 Unit 6: Follow-up interval rationale
- NU 673 Unit 7: Interdisciplinary consultation note
- NU 673 Unit 8: Serial encounter record
- NU 674 Unit 4: Least restrictive option analysis
- NU 670 Unit 4: Adverse effect derivation record
- NU 671 Unit 4: Medical mimic exclusion log
- NU 672 Unit 4: Treatment goal hierarchy
NU 673 Unit 4 questions, answered
Can the brief just state the consent age?
Not safely. Rules on minor consent differ by state, by the kind of care and sometimes by the professional's license, and several states treat mental health care differently from general medical care. Write what governs the arrangement you describe, say where you verified it, and mark anything you could not confirm. Instructors generally treat that visible checking as a strength rather than as hedging.
How much should a parent be told?
That is exactly the question the brief is supposed to answer, and it answers by category rather than by instinct: what is routinely shared, what is shared with the young person's agreement, and what would be disclosed regardless. Whatever you write, tie it to the arrangement and jurisdiction you named at the start and avoid claiming a rule that holds nationally.
Does the school ever get information without a release?
Treat any communication as requiring authorization unless your own verification says otherwise, and describe the release in the document: who signed it, what it covers and how long it lasts. Papers that describe an informal chat with a counselor, however well intended, have described a disclosure, and the reader grading the brief will read it exactly that way.
Where can I find a free NU 673 Unit 4 sample paper?
The complete NU 673 Unit 4 adolescent confidentiality brief is posted here free, consent, privacy, parent requests and the safety plan. A brief for a different age or state can be prepared on request.
Can a therapist tell parents what a 16-year-old says in therapy?
It depends on state law and who consented. Where a minor consents to counseling alone, federal rules generally treat them as the decision maker for that care, with exceptions for serious safety risks, as this sample explains.