Term Paper on "Self-Disclosure Communication"

Term Paper 14 pages (4081 words) Sources: 5 Style: APA

[EXCERPT] . . . .

Self-Disclosure

COMING OUT of ONE'S SHELL

Self-Disclosure Communication

Self-disclosure refers to both the conscious and unconscious revelation of one's thoughts, feelings, experiences and other personal matters (Sprecher 1987). Self-disclosure begins from the time one person meets another. It continues as their relationship develops. As two persons get to know each other, they tend to reveal themselves more and more. But if one of them refuses to open up, the other tends to do the same. In counseling, the patient needs to self-disclose or open up. The therapist listens and helps the patient see things in different angles. The therapist's interpretation enables the patient to better assess his options. This, in turn, provides him with greater sense of power to make better decisions in his life (Sprecher).

The Social Relations Model Degree method of study revealed that self-disclosure was strongly influenced by individual differences and by relationship effects (Levesque et al. 2002). According to test results, persons prefer to disclose to particular individuals. When a relationship is established, disclosure proceeds with perceived intimacy. It was also strongly mutual. The Social Relations Model is used to study self-disclosure. Self-disclosure theory is vital in the development of personal relationships, relational intimacy and relationship dissolution. Findings of existing researches on friendship and self-disclosure showed differences between male-to-male friendships and female-to-female friendships in self-disclosure and perceived intimacy (Levesque et al.).

Another method is the Social Relations Model or SRM (Levesque et al. 2002). It uses three components, namely the actor or the discloser, the partner or the disclosure recipient, and the relationship. The actor effect deals with individual differences in the tendency to disclose, while the partner effect, on the tendency to become the recipient of the disclosure. SRM also distinguishes between individual and dryadic or relational level reciprocity. A study used SRM in analyzing relationships, including self-disclosure, among 16 groups of well-acquainted roommates of a small residential college. Consistent with the results of earlier studies, findings of this study showed that persons tend to disclose at similar levels among all group members. They also tended to disclose in order to accommodate the demands of dryadic relationships. This meant that persons adjust the level of what they disclose about themselves to fit their unique relationships. The pattern of self-disclosure among men compared with that of women. Disclosure of intimate information also depended on the uniqueness of the relationship (Levesque et al.).

The evidence drawn from individual tendencies towards generalized reciprocity suggested the importance of self-disclosure to group maintenance (Levesque et al. 2002). Individuals living together in a group should preserve group function in order to do so. The study also showed that gender was not obstacle in self-disclosure. Men and women both generally tended to disclose personal information according to the level of relationship. However, married women tended to disclose personal information than unmarried women. It is the opposite in the case of men. Unmarried men shared more intimate personal information than married men among themselves. Researchers theorized that the tendencies depended on how they structured their friendships or relationships. Boys also tended to interact more strongly with large groups, while girls preferred small group interaction. Hence, men's friendships were more group-focused, while women's friendships were more relational. Overall, women thought more about relationships than did men (Levesque et al.).

Self-Disclosure Among Health Care Providers

The lack of a guarantee from immunity to prosecution has discouraged healthcare providers from voluntary disclosure of information (Mustokoff et al. 2000). They would be more inclined to yield improprieties if the Department of Justice and the Department of Health and Human Services of the Office of the Inspector General would guarantee full amnesty to the healthcare companies. The two government agencies responded to this need and offered incentives for full disclosure by the companies. The current policy offering the incentives has, however, not offered or provided automatic amnesty from prosecution. Neither did it provide a consistent standard for determining when criminal prosecution was warranted (Mustokoff et al.).

The two agencies conducted a pilot voluntary-disclosure program, which did not contain amnesty provisions, from 1995 to 1997 (Mustokoff et al. 2000). Only 11 healthcare entities participated. Of the 11, only seven of them were accepted into the Operation Restore Trust program of the two agencies. Other healthcare providers were believed to have refused participation for fear of getting disclosed and prosecuted. A guidance memorandum for U.S. attorneys on the use of the False Claims Act, published on June 3, 1998, emphasized the importance of suing healthcare providers in a fair manner. A 12-month review of the impact of the guidance conducted by the U.S. General Auditing Office in 1998 and 1999 found it to run against the DOJ's enforcement practices. The OIG's 1998 voluntary discloser protocol also failed to motivate the provider to voluntarily disclose its problem. Instead, it refused to set a firm commitment on how a given disclosure problem was to be resolved. The OIG's last protocol merely asked providers and their counsel to hope for the best rather than provide clear incentives to participate in its disclosure initiative. OIG Inspector General June Gibbs Brown said that the new protocol attracted the participation of more health care providers than the original Operation Restore Trust program did. He said that 55 providers participated and 50 of them were accepted into the voluntary-disclosure program. He attributed the community's reluctance to the possibility or likelihood of civil and criminal charges for defrauding the Medicare program. She, however, failed to offer any reassurance or incentive to override the reluctance. There was no offer of immunity from prosecution or amnesty. Instead, she stressed that the OIG held the right to impose sanctions, such as penalties and program exclusion. The only offer she made was that the OIG might not choose to impose a corporate integrity agreement and, instead forgo the exclusion remedy in the event of self-disclosure. Furthermore, those who participated could not withhold any information. They would provide a detailed description of the violation; perform a self-audit, using the OIG's strict guidelines; and fully cooperate with the OIG in its investigation of the information they would provide (Mustokoff et al.).

Model Self-Disclosure Amnesty Programs

Tax Amnesty Program

The DOJ and the OIG could learn from the examples set by successful government amnesty programs on tax, environmental and antitrust law (Mustokoff et al. 2000). The tax amnesty program is the oldest and clearest example. While it does not expressly offer immunity from prosecution, its offer of prosecutorial restrain for many decades has encouraged taxpayers to voluntarily disclose potential legal violations. It maintains an informal policy of withholding a recommendation of criminal prosecution under specific conditions. Through its tax amnesty program, the Internal Revenue Service has expressed its dedication not to prosecute ordinary people who only make mistakes in their income tax returns. It had no intention of changing this practice. It stressed that its voluntary disclosure policy was neither an amnesty nor a grant of immunity from prosecution. Rather, it was an exercise of prosecutorial discretion, which did not constitute a legal right on taxpayers. It has been effective and popular. The 1993 report said that more than 140,000 taxpayers participated in its voluntary-disclosure program. The tax amnesty policy was refined in 1996 by including voluntary discretion among other factors to determine a recommendation for prosecution. The disclosure had to be timely and voluntary. It had to precede a probable inquiry by the IRS or an audit. It was not available to taxpayers who self-disclosed only because the IRS probably already knew of their anomaly. The benefits of this program can now be enjoyed by both taxpayers and the government. It lets the government raise revenue without the need to increase tax rates and compliance by taxpayers. Tax evaders pay delinquent taxes and the interest due. The government, on the other hand, avoids the cost and burden of criminal prosecution and imposing civil penalties (Mustokoff et al.).

Environmental Amnesty Program

The amnesty policy of this program, like the tax amnesty model, does not provide an absolute guarantee of amnesty (Mustokoff et al. 2000). But unlike this previous model, it expressly shields one from prosecution, as long as the criteria for participation are met. The objective of this amnesty policy of the Environmental Protection Agency or EPA is to enhance the protection of human health and the environment. This is by encouraging regulated entities to voluntarily discover, disclose, correct and prevent violations of federal environment requirements. As incentives, the program eliminates or reduces penalties; does not refer the case for criminal prosecution; and will not use the audit report as basis for further civil or criminal action. In order to qualify for the incentives, the violation must be discovered through a completely voluntary compliance program; revealed in writing within 10 days and corrected within 60; not first discovered through some regulatory action or a whistle-blower initiative; not part of a series of repeat violations; not causing serious damage on the environment or violating a court order; and not resulting from corporate concealment or condoning environmental… READ MORE

How to Reference "Self-Disclosure Communication" Term Paper in a Bibliography

Related Term Papers:

Self-Disclosure, Gender and Communication Self Article Critique

Self-Disclosure, Gender and Communication

Self- Disclosure, Gender and Communication

The article "Can we talk? Researcher talks about the role of communication in happy marriages" written by Schoenberg is an article… read more

Article Critique 2 pages (628 words) Sources: 2 Topic: Family / Dating / Marriage

---

Personality and Communication Affect on Supervision Term Paper

PERSONALITY & COMMUNICATION: AFFECT ON SUPERVISION

Imagine that you are sitting in a room with three other people: a convicted serial killer, an eccentric scientist, and a four-year-old child. If… read more

Term Paper 20 pages (5219 words) Sources: 1+ Topic: Communication / Speech

---

Interpersonal Communications Communication Is Very Important Essay

Interpersonal Communications

Communication is very important in all types of relationships so that people can connect with one another to find out how to make things n peace. In order… read more

Essay 6 pages (1977 words) Sources: 10 Topic: Communication / Speech

---

Therapeutic Communication the Communication O Be Evaluated Thesis

Therapeutic Communication

The communication o be evaluated took place on February 24, 2009 in the early afternoon. The setting was a residential care facility for the elderly. The conversation took… read more

Thesis 5 pages (1598 words) Sources: 1+ Style: APA Topic: Communication / Speech

---

Interpersonal Communication Here Culture Term Paper

Interpersonal Communication

Here

Culture in interpersonal communication

Interpersonal communication lies at the junction of our cultural understanding and construction and consequently, each of these components influences one another in more… read more

Term Paper 4 pages (1514 words) Sources: 1+ Topic: Communication / Speech

---

View 100+ more related papers  >>