A practical pattern atlas

Respond to a sensitive disclosure with accountable support

Keep disclosure, present safety, user choice and service responsibility distinct.

Sensitive design proposal · Clinical and safeguarding review required
Entry

A personal conversation includes distress, possible harm or coercion.

Proposed flow

  1. Listen

    Take the account seriously without blame, forced interpretation or an abuse verdict.

  2. Clarify present needs

    Ask only relevant questions; suicide concerns and immediate danger require the specialist-reviewed response.

  3. Check safe access

    Consider whether the device and contact method are safe; quick exit has limited privacy protection.

  4. Offer real support

    Use independent verified destinations; do not route to an implicated person or invent a staffed transfer.

  5. Explain data and responsibility

    Name actual sharing and confidentiality limits; apply reviewed local safeguarding duties.

Recovery and alternative routes

Unavailable services need real alternatives. Ordinary doubt, historical text analysis and repeated questions must not automatically become diagnoses. This flow is not a clinical scale or an abuse investigation.

What counts as a complete outcome

Human-help routes remain reachable; the app does not claim rescue, monitoring or clinical efficacy.

Decisions within this flow

36 · AI agency and care

Support without spiritual pressure

Respond to difficult topics with choice, humility and appropriate support.

Sensitive design proposal · Specialist review required
37 · AI agency and care

Safety follows the conversation context

Distinguish a historical text question from an immediate personal safety concern.

Sensitive design proposal · Specialist review required
62 · AI agency and care

Suicide concerns receive a direct, humane response

Prioritise immediate safety and real human support without shutting the person out.

Sensitive design proposal · Clinical review required
63 · AI agency and care

Take a disclosure seriously without requiring a label

Support safety and choice even when the person is unsure whether an experience was abuse.

Sensitive design proposal · Safeguarding review required
64 · AI agency and care

Spiritual authority does not excuse coercion

Recognise possible misuse of religious power without defending the institution or adjudicating theology.

Sensitive design proposal · Safeguarding review required
65 · AI agency and care

Support access accounts for monitored devices

Treat screen traces, notifications and stored disclosures as part of the safety problem.

Sensitive design proposal · Safeguarding review required
67 · AI agency and care

A support route has a real owner

Make human contact, confidentiality and safeguarding responsibilities explicit.

Sensitive design proposal · Safeguarding review required
66 · AI agency and care

Spiritual practice does not replace health care

Clarify service scope when wellness, illness and faith overlap.

Sensitive design proposal · Clinical review required
61 · AI agency and care

Repeated reassurance needs a different response

Notice distressing certainty loops without labelling ordinary faith questions as illness.

Sensitive design proposal · Specialist review required
27 · AI agency and care

Support human connections

Keep quiet, exit and appropriate human support available.

Research-informed design proposal
26 · Conversation and content

Listen, ask permission and repair

Make correction and refusal normal parts of a conversation.

Research-informed design proposal

Engagement facets to specify

Possible situations: Doubt, lament and life questions. These are overlapping task contexts, not fixed user categories.

Specify the chosen purpose, passage unit, pace, participation, social setting, interpretive task, environment and disclosure or teaching responsibility. Use the scenario framework.