A practical pattern atlas
Respond to a sensitive disclosure with accountable support
Keep disclosure, present safety, user choice and service responsibility distinct.
A personal conversation includes distress, possible harm or coercion.
Proposed flow
- Listen
Take the account seriously without blame, forced interpretation or an abuse verdict.
- Clarify present needs
Ask only relevant questions; suicide concerns and immediate danger require the specialist-reviewed response.
- Check safe access
Consider whether the device and contact method are safe; quick exit has limited privacy protection.
- Offer real support
Use independent verified destinations; do not route to an implicated person or invent a staffed transfer.
- 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
Support without spiritual pressure
Respond to difficult topics with choice, humility and appropriate support.
Sensitive design proposal · Specialist review required37 · AI agency and careSafety follows the conversation context
Distinguish a historical text question from an immediate personal safety concern.
Sensitive design proposal · Specialist review required62 · AI agency and careSuicide concerns receive a direct, humane response
Prioritise immediate safety and real human support without shutting the person out.
Sensitive design proposal · Clinical review required63 · AI agency and careTake 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 required64 · AI agency and careSpiritual authority does not excuse coercion
Recognise possible misuse of religious power without defending the institution or adjudicating theology.
Sensitive design proposal · Safeguarding review required65 · AI agency and careSupport access accounts for monitored devices
Treat screen traces, notifications and stored disclosures as part of the safety problem.
Sensitive design proposal · Safeguarding review required67 · AI agency and careA support route has a real owner
Make human contact, confidentiality and safeguarding responsibilities explicit.
Sensitive design proposal · Safeguarding review required66 · AI agency and careSpiritual practice does not replace health care
Clarify service scope when wellness, illness and faith overlap.
Sensitive design proposal · Clinical review required61 · AI agency and careRepeated reassurance needs a different response
Notice distressing certainty loops without labelling ordinary faith questions as illness.
Sensitive design proposal · Specialist review required27 · AI agency and careSupport human connections
Keep quiet, exit and appropriate human support available.
Research-informed design proposal26 · Conversation and contentListen, ask permission and repair
Make correction and refusal normal parts of a conversation.
Research-informed design proposalEngagement 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.