Some ethicists argue that patient confidentiality is absolute and thus should never be broken. I examine these arguments that when critically scrutinised, become porous. I will explore the concept of patient confidentiality and argue that although, this is a very important medical and bioethical issue, this needs to be wisely delivered to reduce third party harm or even detriment to the patient. The argument for absolute confidentiality is particularly weak when it comes to genetic information and inherited (...) disease. (shrink)
“Privacy as confidentiality” has been the dominant paradigm in computer science privacy research. Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PETs) that guarantee confidentiality of personal data or anonymous communication have resulted from such research. The objective of this paper is to show that such PETs are indispensable but are short of being the privacy solutions they sometimes claim to be given current day circumstances. Using perspectives from surveillance studies we will argue that the computer scientists’ conception of privacy through data or (...) communication confidentiality is techno-centric and displaces end-user perspectives and needs in surveillance societies. We will further show that the perspectives from surveillance studies also demand a critical review for their human-centric conception of information systems. Last, we rethink the position of PETs in a surveillance society and argue for the necessity of multiple paradigms for addressing privacy concerns in information systems design. (shrink)
Although in the US there have been dozens of subpoenas seeking information gathered by academic researchers under a pledge of confidentiality, few cases have garnered as much attention as the two sets of subpoenas issued to Boston College seeking interviews conducted with IRA operatives who participated in The Belfast Project, an oral history of The Troubles in Northern Ireland. For the researchers and participants, confidentiality was understood to be unlimited, while Boston College has asserted that it pledged (...) class='Hi'>confidentiality only “to the extent American law allows.” This a priori limitation to confidentiality is invoked by many researchers and universities in the United States, Canada and Great Britain, but there has been little discussion of what the phrase means and what ethical obligations accompany it. An examination of the researchers’ and Boston College’s behaviour in relation to the subpoenas provides the basis for that discussion. We conclude that Boston College has provided an example that will be cited for years to come of how not to protect research participants to the extent American law allows. (shrink)
The importance of medical confidentiality is obvious to anyone who has ever been a patient, and protecting private information about patients is one of the key responsibilities of healthcare professionals. However, maintaining the confidentiality of patients who are incarcerated in prisons poses several ethical challenges. In this chapter we explain the importance of confidentiality in general, and the dilemmas that sometimes face doctors with regard to it, before describing some of the specific difficulties faced by prison doctors. (...) Although healthcare professionals working in prisons have the same duty to respect confidentiality as those working in the wider community, the conflicts of interest caused by their dual loyalty to prisoners and to prison authorities can make it very difficult to strike the right balance between respecting confidentiality and protecting prisoners and third parties. We illustrate some of the dilemmas facing prison doctors with a series of case discussions before providing suggestions for resolving these difficult situations. Ideally, a combination of great ethical and legal sensitivity on the part of healthcare professionals and general respect for prisoners’ rights on the part of other prison staff enables most issues to be resolved without the need to compromise patients’ confidentiality. (shrink)
It is broadly held that confidentiality may be breached when doing so can avert grave harm to a third party. This essay challenges the conventional wisdom. Neither legal duties, personal morality nor personal values are sufficient to ground professional obligations. A methodology is developed drawing on core professional values, the nature of professions, and the justification for distinct professional obligations. Though doctors have a professional obligation to prevent public peril, they do not honor it by breaching confidentiality. It (...) is shown how the protective purpose to be furthered by reporting is defeated by the practice of reporting. Hence there is no conflict between confidentiality and the professional responsibility to protect endangered third parties. (shrink)
As in other professions, such as law and medicine, accounting has a Code of Professional Conduct (Code) that members are expected to abide by. In today''s legalistic society, however, the question of what is the right thing to do, is often confused with what is legal? In many instances, this may present a conflict between adhering to the Code and doing what some may perceive as proper ethical behavior. This paper examines (1) the reasoning process that CPAs use in resolving (...) ethical issues related to confidentiality; and, (2) whether or not there is a perceived conflict in adhering to the Code and the moral values of some CPAs. The results indicate that although most CPAs sampled resolve ethical issues in accordance with the Code, such decisions do not always reflect their belief of what is morally right. Although the results are useful in understanding how some CPAs reason in making moral choices involving confidentiality decisions, care should be exercised in drawing further inferences from this study due to the limited sample size. (shrink)
Informed consent and confidentiality supposedly minimize harm for research participants in all qualitative research methodologies, inclusive of one-on-one unstructured interviews and focus groups. This is not the case for the latter. Confidentiality and informed consent uniquely manifest themselves as endemic ethical dilemmas for focus group researchers. The principle of caveat emptor (let the buyer beware) may be a more useful tool for those involved in focus group research: that is, let the researcher, the participants and the ethics committee (...) beware that the only ethical assurance that can be given to focus group participants is that there are few ethical assurances. These ethical dilemmas are not sufficiently realized in the literature, and if they are discussed, they are often dealt with within the focus group moderator’s preamble to the group discussion. This paper encourages the mandatory use of a participant information sheet sufficiently detailed to engender the participant’s active consent. Sufficient here means the participant must be made adequately aware of these endemic ethical dilemmas in advance, to allow them to consent to share responsibility for any ensuing harm. The focus group moderator is not their sole protector. (shrink)
This article challenges the importance and necessity of confidentiality, which are often taken for granted, and questions whether the default promise of confidentiality to all participants, particularly in educational research, could in fact be an unnecessary concern. This article begins by reviewing the difference in the way confidentiality is handled in different fields and the applicability of some underlying assumptions. This is followed by an explanation of why confidentiality is investigated in the sense of anonymity in (...) this article. Then the article draws on an empirical study where original researchers and their original participants were interviewed about their views on anonymity. Lastly, the contradiction between the promises of confidentiality and the recognition of a participant’s contribution is highlighted. The article concludes with a call for more empirical observation and investigation into the importance of confidentiality. (shrink)
Confidentiality is a core value in medicine and public health yet, like other core values, it is not absolute. Medical ethics has typically allowed for breaches of confidentiality when there is a credible threat of significant harm to an identifiable third party. Medical ethics has been less explicit in spelling out criteria for allowing breaches of confidentiality to protect populations, instead tending to defer these decisions to the law. But recently, issues in military detention settings have raised (...) the profile of decisions to breach medical confidentiality in efforts to protect the broader population. National and international ethics documents say little about the confidentiality of detainee medical records. But initial decisions to use detainee medical records to help craft coercive interrogations led to widespread condemnation, and might have contributed to detainee health problems, such as a large number of suicide attempts several of which have been successful. More recent military guidance seems to reflect lessons learned from these problems and does more to protect detainee records. For the public health system, this experience is a reminder of the importance of confidentiality in creating trustworthy, and effective, means to protect the public's health. (shrink)
In “Advisory Opinion on Confidentiality, Its Limits and Duties to Others” the Canadian Interagency Advisory Panel on Research Ethics (PRE) articulates a rationale for a priori limitations to research confidentiality, based largely on putative legal duties to violate confidentiality in certain circumstances. We argue that PRE promotes a “Law of the Land” doctrine of research ethics that is but one approach to resolving potential conflicts between law and research ethics. PRE emphasises risks that have never materialized, and (...) ignores jurisprudence on challenges to research confidentiality. When we examine what the courts have actually done with research-based claims of privilege, we find they clearly recognize and affirm researchers’ ethical obligations to maintain strict confidentiality and protect research participants. Ironically, the one exception – where the court ordered that information be disclosed – occurred precisely because the researchers had limited confidentiality. The passive approach PRE espouses leaves vital questions about what protecting confidentiality to the “full extent possible in law” means, and leaves the impression that academics should accept whatever limitations the courts may impose without participating in the courtroom dialogue determining where those limits are drawn. In contrast, we believe confidentiality is so important to the protection of research participants and the integrity of the research enterprise that it is worth fighting for. The “ethics-first” doctrine of “strict confidentiality” we describe adheres to the social sciences’ and humanities’ longstanding commitment to research confidentiality and duty to the research participant. (shrink)
Recently, there has been increased interest in the involvement of family members in treating psychiatric patients who are involuntarily admitted into mental hospitals (Goodwin and Happel 2006; Wilkinson and McAndrew 2008). Family is, for instance, expected to be of use in preventing escalations and aggression on the wards by giving information about patient needs and providing support to the patient. Yet, in practice, family is not routinely involved in the treatment process, and is not even regularly informed about situations (Marshall (...) and Solomon 2003). Professionals mention privacy and confidentiality as issues that constrain collaboration with family (Goodwin and Happel 2006; Wynaden and Orb 2005). .. (shrink)
Confidentiality is one of the foundations on which psychotherapy is built. Limitations on confidentiality in the therapeutic process have been explained and explored by many authors and organizations. However, controversy and confusion continue to exist with regard to the limitations on confidentiality in situations where clients are considering their options at the end of life and after a client has died. This article reviews these 2 areas and provides some suggestions for future research.
The old literature on whether medical confidentiality may be breached to warn a spouse of a risk of contracting syphilis from his/her partner — a deep and rich literature — has become relevant once again in the context of HIV infection and AIDS. This paper examines the reasoning and method employed in: the Catholic approach centered around the patient's (property) right to the secret; a (generic) model of justice, utilizing minimal principles of non-aggression and restitution; and an approach involving (...) the elimination of unstable alternatives: the view that public health officials, but not the spouse, may/must be notified; and, that maintaining that the physician is at liberty to disclose but is not obliged to do so. The theory and method behind confidentiality turns out to be deeper than you might have anticipated. (shrink)
Community based research is conducted by, for, and with the participation of community members, and aims to ensure that knowledge contributes to making a concrete and constructive difference in the world (The Loka Institute 2002 ). Yet decisions about research ethics are often controlled outside the research community itself. In this analysis we grapple with the imposition of a community confidentiality clause and the implications it had for consent, confidentiality, and capacity in a province-wide community based research project. (...) Through untangling these implications we provide recommendations for reframing how to think about research ethics and strategies for enabling research ethics’ processes to be more responsive to and respectful of community-based research. (shrink)
The AIDS epidemic calls for an ethical analysis of conflicting obligations surrounding HIV-infected psychiatric patients and confidentiality, as well as issues that go beyond confidentiality. Although laws pertaining to HIV infection have been enacted in a number of states, these statutes leave much discretion to health professionals. The ethical principle known as "the harm principle" can permit disclosure of confidential information and detention or isolation of psychiatric patients who pose a threat of infecting other patients. From an ethical (...) point of view, however, the circumstances under which traditional protections may be weakened or abandoned remain limited. (shrink)
In the practice of medicine there has long been a conflict between patient management and respect for patient autonomy. In recent years this conflict has taken on a new form as patient management has increasingly been shifted from physicians to insurers, employers, and health care bureaucracies. The consequence has been a diminshment of both physician and patient autonomy and a parallel diminishment of medical record confidentiality. Although the new managers pay lip service to the rights of patients to (...) class='Hi'>confidentiality of their records, in fact they advocate very liberal medical records access policies. They argue that a wide range of parties has a need to know the contents of individually identifiable medical records in order to control costs, promote quality of care, and undertake research in the public interest. Broad interpretations of the need to know, however, are at odds with strict interpretations of the right to confidentiality. Strict confidentiality policies require that, with few exceptions, patient consent be obtained whenever a patient's record is used outside the treatment context. The traditional criterion for overriding the consent requirement has been that without the override some harm would directly result. This rule is now challenged by the claim that patients have a duty to make their records available for a wide range of research and public health purposes. The longstanding tension between physician responsibility for patient welfare and respect for patient autonomy is being replaced by a debatable requirement that both physician and patient autonomy be subordinated to the goals of data collection and analysis. (shrink)
School psychologists often break confidentiality if confronted with risky adolescent behavior. Members of the National Association of School Psychologists ( N = 78) responded to a survey containing a vignette describing an adolescent engaging in risky behaviors and rated the degree to which it is ethical to break confidentiality for behaviors of varying frequency, intensity, and duration. Respondents generally found it ethical to break confidentiality when risky adolescent behaviors became more dangerous or potentially harmful, although there was (...) considerable variability between respondents. Significant gender effects were found between male and female respondents for alcohol use, and a significant Form Type (i.e., male or female vignette) Frequency/Duration interaction was observed for antisocial behaviors. School psychologists could benefit from further training in ethical decision making because these ethical dilemmas are not always clear-cut. (shrink)
This study explored psychologists' perceptions of confidentiality violations. One hundred ninety-five psychologists answered questionnaires about a vignette regarding a male therapist accused of violating the confidentiality of a female client. The vignette varied on the following variables: (a) Confidential information was conveyed to either an insurance company or another client, (b) the therapist's account of the violation included either an excuse or a justification, and (c) scapegoating was included or not included in the account. The insurance condition and (...) excuse condition produced more lenient judgments of the violation. However, excuses elicited more negative judgments of the therapist. Scapegoating generally elicited more negative judgments. Differences in the recipient of confidential information and the accounts given for violations have an impact on psychologists' perceptions of confidentiality violations. (shrink)
This article explores the relations among and between intimacy, psychotherapeutic relationships and moral advice. The article concludes that a psychotherapeutic relationship is not usefully explained in terms of intimacy. Instead, a psychiatric relationship is a form of moral advice, and it is this dimension of a psychotherapeutic relationship as a form of moral advice that poses a natural limit to the confidentiality necessary for engaging in psychotherapy.
The principle of individual medical confidentiality is one of the moral principles that Africa inherited unquestioningly from the West as part of Western medicine. The HIV/AIDS pandemic in Southern Africa has reduced the relevance of the principle of individual medical confidentiality. Individual medical confidentiality has especially presented challenges for practitioners among the Bantu communities that are well known for their social inter-connectedness and the way they value their extended family relations. Individual confidentiality has raised several unforeseen (...) problems for persons living with HIV/AIDS, ranging from stigma and isolation to feelings of dejection as it drives them away from their families as a way of trying to keep information about their conditions confidential. The involvement of family members in treatment decisions is in line with the philosophy of Ubuntu and serves to respect patients’ and families’ autonomy while at the same time benefiting the individual patient. (shrink)
Bernhard and Young (Journal of Academic Ethics, 7, 175-191, 2009) allege that a myth of confidentiality plagues research in North America because of the absence of statute-based legal protections and the requirements of some REBs to limit confidentiality to the extent permitted by law. In this commentary we describe statute-based protections for research confidentiality available in the United States, clarify the legal situation regarding research confidentiality in Canada, and explain that REBs that require confidentiality to (...) be limited by law are imposing a doctrine that is not required by the TCPS and may violate researchers’ academic freedom. The paper laments how excessive REB risk aversion and inaction by the granting agency Presidents has created a situation where some REBs are encouraging researchers to download research risks to research participants and forcing researchers to choose between exposing themselves to the prospect of going to jail to protect confidentiality, watering down their research objectives, or conducting vanilla research rather than engaging in controversial and/or sensitive areas of study. The paper urges the granting agency Presidents to seek legislative change to protect research participants who provide information that could cause them harm if their identity were to be revealed. (shrink)
Clinical psychologists' and nonpsychiatric physicians' attitudes and behaviors in sexual and confidentiality boundary violations were examined. The 171 participants' responses were analyzed by profession, sex, and status (student, resident, professional) on semantic differential, boundary violation vignettes, and a version of Pope, Tabachnick, and Keith-Spiegel's (1987) ethical scale. Psychologists rated sexual boundary violation as more unethical than did physicians (p<.001). Rationale (p<.01) and timing (p<.001) influenced ratings. Psychologists reported fewer sexualized behaviors than physicians (p<05). Professional experience (p<.01) and sex (p<.05) (...) were associated with confidence-violating behavior. Overall, 78% of the sample reported attitudes or behaviors associated with boundary violations. The behavior violations were correlated (r=.49). Actual violators rated vignette violators more leniently than did nonviolators (p<.01). (shrink)
Recruiting patients into clinical research is essential for the advancement of medical knowledge. However, when the physician undertaking the care of the patient is also responsible for recruitment into clinical research, a situation arises of an inter-role breach of confidentiality which is distinguishable from other conflicts of interest. Such discord arises as the physician utilizes confidential information obtained within the therapeutic relationship beyond its primary objective, and safeguards ought to be observed in order to avert this important, and generally (...) overlooked, problem. The moral worth of the pledge of confidentiality is based not on its innate value but on its being a promise on which subsequent interactions and disclosures are founded. Within the patient-doctor interaction, confidentiality is an important facet of the promised fidelity and, as such, a loose interpretation of the notion threatens the essence of the relationship, and any violation thereof requires compelling moral justification. To avoid conflict, patients' confidential information ought not be used for the purpose of recruitment, which needs to be undertaken through general education and non-directed appeals, and a preliminary consent to be approached for research should be obtained from the patient prior to her being identified as a suitable research subject. Securing this prior consent would avoid one source of potential, albeit unintended, coercion. (shrink)
Child and adolescent researchers must balance increasingly complex sets of ethical, legal, and scientific standards when investigating child and adolescent mental disorders. Few guidelines are available. One mechanism that provides the investigator immunity from legally compelled disclosure of research records is described. However, discretion must be exercised in its use, especially with regard to abuse reporting, voluntary disclosure of abuse, and protection of research data. Examples of discretionary issues in the use of the certificate of confidentiality are provided.
Therapeutic reactivity among psychology trainees (N = 68) was ascertained by their response to 10 clinical vignettes depicting clients with HIV who are sexually active with uninformed partners. This construct accounts for the relative change in decisions to maintain the confidentiality of clients who acknowledge safe versus unsafe sexual behavior. As anticipated, an analysis of variance revealed a significant main effect for safety and a significant 3-way interaction (Sexual Orientation × Safety × Gender). Subsequent analyses revealed that trainees exhibit (...) the highest level of therapeutic reactivity toward heterosexual male clients, and the lowest reactive stance toward heterosexual female clients. Although the decisional pattern evidenced toward heterosexuals seems congruent with epidemiological estimates of risk, the decisions toward lesbians and gay males appear more likely a function of bias. The ethical implications of these findings are discussed. (shrink)
Respect for confidentiality is firmly established in codes of ethics and law. Medical care and the patients' trust depend on the ability of the doctors to maintain confidentiality. Without a guarantee of confidentiality, many patients would want to avoid seeking medical assistance The principle of confidentiality, however, is not absolute and may be overridden by public interests. On some occasions (birth, death, infectious disease) there is a legal obligation on the part of the doctor to disclose (...) but only to the appropriate authorities. Permissible disclosure can be granted by the patients' consent, for example, for the purpose of insurance they may wish to take out. Moreover, there are some ambivalent situations (such as criminal acts, or notification of sexual partner in case of a patient with AIDS) for which Greek law does not include relevant provisions, and the Codes of Medical Ethics do not offer clear guidelines. Therefore, the Greek doctor is called to estimate the situation and assume full responsibility for his decision. Finally, new considerations have arisen in the context of the recent advances in the field of telemedicine and electronic archiving. The paper discusses the current situation and legislation in Greece. (shrink)
Protecting confidentiality is an essential value in all human relationships, no less in medical practice and research.1 Doctor-patient and researcher-participant relationships are built on trust and on the understanding those patients' secrets will not be disclosed.2 However, this confidentiality can be breached in some situations where it is necessary to meet a strong conflicting duty.3Confidentiality, in a general sense, has received much interest in Islamic resources including the Qur'an, Sunnah and juristic writings. However, medical and research confidentiality (...) have not been explored deeply. There are few fatwas about the issue, despite an increased effort by both individuals and Islamic medical organizations to use these institutional fatwas in their research.Infringements on confidentiality make up a significant portion of institutional fatwas, yet they have never been thoroughly investigated. Moreover, the efforts of organizations and authors in this regard still require further exploration, especially on the issue of research confidentiality.In this article, we explore medical and research confidentiality and potential conflicts with this practice as a result of fatwas released by international, regional, and national Islamic Sunni juristic councils. We discuss how these fatwas affect research and publication by Muslim doctors, researchers, and Islamic medical organizations.We argue that more specialized fatwas are needed to clarify Islamic juristic views about medical and research confidentiality, especially the circumstances in which infringements on this confidentiality are justified. (shrink)
Journalists seldom consider the layers of those affected by their actions; third parties such as families, children, and even people unlucky enough to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. This article argues for consideration of the broader group, considering a range of options available for doing their duty to inform the public while also minimizing harm to others. Journalists might compare themselves with other professions that have similar roles, such as anthropologists, on such issues as confidentiality (...) and disclosure. A broader lesson is the value of applying different views, theoretical frameworks, and starting points to the ethical issues in any profession. (shrink)
Two related studies focused on the effects that a questionable supervisory conduct has on the endorsement and vulnerability of the supervisor, as well as on judgments of supervisory morality. Male and female undergraduate and graduate business students were asked to read the account of a personnel manager who violates employee confidentiality concerning certain personality test results, but who has had a previous record of increasing or decreasing productivity. The studies revealed varying patterns of leadership endorsement, vulnerability, and judgments of (...) morality following this questionable or unethical conduct as a result of the personnel's manager's record and the subjects' sex. (shrink)
Management and non-management employees of a northeastern bank read a description of a manager who engaged in a breach of confidentiality. Subjects were asked to evaluate the acceptability of 27 excuses. Results showed that subjects' ratings of acceptability were affected by their individual perception of the severity of the stimulus manager's breach of confidentiality. Subjects' rank did not affect acceptability of accounts.
The series: General Editors: John Harris, University of Manchester; Soren Holm, University of Manchester. Consulting Editor: Ranaan Gillon, Director, Imperial College Health Service, London. North American Consulting Editor: Bonnie Steinbock, Professor of Philosophy, SUNY, Albany. -/- The late twentieth century has witnessed dramatic technological developments in biomedical science and the delivery of health care, and these developments have brought with them important social changes. All too often ethical analysis has lagged behind these changes. The purpose of this series is to (...) provide lively, up-to-date, and authoritative studies for the increasingly large and diverse readership concerned with issues in biomedical ethics--not just health care trainees and professionals, but also social scientists, philosophers, lawyers, social workers, and legislators. The series will feature both single-author and multi-author books, short and accessible enough to be widely read, each of them focused on an issue of outstanding current importance and interest. Philosophers, doctors, and lawyers from several countries already feature among the contributors to the series. It promises to become the leading channel for the best original work in this burgeoning field. -/- This book: Testing and screening for HIV and AIDS give rise to ethical, legal, and social issues of the most controversial and delicate kind. An international team of eighteen doctors, philosophers, and lawyers present a fresh and thorough discussion of these issues; they aim to show the way to practical advances but also to give an accessible guide to the debates for readers new to them. The contributors pay particular attention to the sensitive nature of the information yielded by a test for HIV antibody. They consider such questions as these: Are we under an obligation to disclose our HIV status if known? Can there be a moral justification for the breaching of confidentiality in certain circumstances? Should health care professionals be forced to undergo HIV testing? Is there a right to remain in ignorance of one's HIV status? Consideration of such questions illuminates not only public policy and medical practice in connection with HIV and AIDS, but also broader issues about professional ethics and individual rights in other medical and social contexts. The breadth and depth of the research represented and the lucidity of the arguments put forward make this a key resource for academic researchers and healthcare professionals alike. (shrink)
BackgroundObtaining a research participant’s voluntary and informed consent is the bedrock of sound ethics practice. Greater inclusion of children in research has led to questions about how paediatric consent operates in practice to accord with current and emerging legal and socio-ethical issues, norms, and requirements.MethodsEmploying a qualitative thematic content analysis, we examined paediatric consent forms from major academic centres and public organisations across Canada dated from 2008–2011, which were purposively selected to reflect different types of research ethics boards, participants, and (...) studies. The studies included biobanking, longitudinal studies, and gene-environment studies. Our purpose was to explore the following six emerging issues: (1) whether the scope of parental consent allows for a child’s assent, dissent, or future consent; (2) whether the concepts of risk and benefit incorporate the child’s psychological and social perspective; (3) whether a child’s ability to withdraw is respected and to what extent withdrawal is permitted; (4) whether the return of research results includes individual results and/or incidental findings and the processes involved therein; (5) whether privacy and confidentiality concerns adequately address the child’s perspective and whether standard data and/or sample identifiability nomenclature is used; and (6) whether retention of and access to paediatric biological samples and associated medical data are addressed.ResultsThe review suggests gaps and variability in the consent forms with respect to addressing each of the six issues. Many forms did not discuss the possibility of returning research results, be they individual or general/aggregate results. Forms were also divided in terms of the scope of parental consent (specific versus broad), and none discussed a process for resolving disputes that can arise when either the parents or the child wishes to withdraw from the study.ConclusionsThe analysis provides valuable insight and evidence into how consent forms address current ethical issues. While we do not thoroughly explore the contexts and reasons behind consent form gaps and variability, we do advocate and formulate the development of best practices for drafting paediatric health research consent forms. This can greatly ameliorate current gaps and facilitate harmonised and yet contextualised approaches to paediatric health research ethics. (shrink)