Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Non-Sexual Dual Relationships - Intro
Non-sexual dual relationships within the field of counseling are a controversial issue. The essential question to be answered is, where is the professional boundary line between counselor and client? Underneath this general ethical umbrella lies many more specific questions that ethicists struggle with. Among these are: Is it alright to provide therapy to a friend or relative? Is it OK to borrow money from clients? If so, how much is OK? Is it OK to go into business with a client? If not, what about going into business with a client's father? These are just a few of the questions that abound within the questionable, debatable ethical realm of dual relationships.
Ethical questions are determined on a case-by-case basis. There are no clear black and white rules that do not warrant debatable alternatives to be discussed and considered. There is one golden rule which stands above the rest within the clinical world of counseling: Do not have sex with a patient. But, apart from this golden rule, there is little that cannot be discussed and deliberated.
Within the counselor's office there is little left to the imagination as to what is ethical and what is not. It is an ethical embassy of sorts, a sanctuary where client exists on one side and counselor, or psychologist, is on the other. The line between them is palatable. The relationship begins and ends within the confines of a physical space. Patient enters and patient leaves. The more difficult dual relationship questions arise when the physical safety of the ethical embassy, which is the counselor's office, becomes invaded, or perhaps does not exist. Small rural communities, military bases, and residential addiction treatment communities are just a few places where the confines of an office are sometimes limited and less geographically defined and private. Even if a psychologist practices in one location and lives in another, there are situations that may occur which puts the psychologist in the middle of a dual relationship ethical dilemma. What is worse is when there are situations or circumstances that inevitably place the psychologist in a dual relationship situation.
All major mental health professional codes contain a proscription against dual relationship. Role theory is often used to describe the process of dual relationships. "Social roles contain inherent expectations about how a person in a particular role is to behave as well as the rights and obligations which pertain to that role". Conflicts within these relationships arise when either role's expectations of the other exceed that which is inherent. When expectations are exceeded, dual relationships are created.
Although dual relationships are generally frowned upon, not all dual relationships are bad. The American Psychological Association ethical principles recognize multiple or dual relationships as something that is sometimes unavoidable. The APA states that, "it may not be feasible or reasonable for psychologists to avoid social or other nonprofessional contact with persons such as patients". The primary warning is in developing a dual relationship when it appears likely that the relationship will interfere with the therapeutic process. If, "it appears likely that such a relationship reasonably might impair the psychologist's objectivity or otherwise interfere with the psychologist's effectively performing his or her functions as a psychologist, or might harm or exploit the other party".
Ethical questions are determined on a case-by-case basis. There are no clear black and white rules that do not warrant debatable alternatives to be discussed and considered. There is one golden rule which stands above the rest within the clinical world of counseling: Do not have sex with a patient. But, apart from this golden rule, there is little that cannot be discussed and deliberated.
Within the counselor's office there is little left to the imagination as to what is ethical and what is not. It is an ethical embassy of sorts, a sanctuary where client exists on one side and counselor, or psychologist, is on the other. The line between them is palatable. The relationship begins and ends within the confines of a physical space. Patient enters and patient leaves. The more difficult dual relationship questions arise when the physical safety of the ethical embassy, which is the counselor's office, becomes invaded, or perhaps does not exist. Small rural communities, military bases, and residential addiction treatment communities are just a few places where the confines of an office are sometimes limited and less geographically defined and private. Even if a psychologist practices in one location and lives in another, there are situations that may occur which puts the psychologist in the middle of a dual relationship ethical dilemma. What is worse is when there are situations or circumstances that inevitably place the psychologist in a dual relationship situation.
All major mental health professional codes contain a proscription against dual relationship. Role theory is often used to describe the process of dual relationships. "Social roles contain inherent expectations about how a person in a particular role is to behave as well as the rights and obligations which pertain to that role". Conflicts within these relationships arise when either role's expectations of the other exceed that which is inherent. When expectations are exceeded, dual relationships are created.
Although dual relationships are generally frowned upon, not all dual relationships are bad. The American Psychological Association ethical principles recognize multiple or dual relationships as something that is sometimes unavoidable. The APA states that, "it may not be feasible or reasonable for psychologists to avoid social or other nonprofessional contact with persons such as patients". The primary warning is in developing a dual relationship when it appears likely that the relationship will interfere with the therapeutic process. If, "it appears likely that such a relationship reasonably might impair the psychologist's objectivity or otherwise interfere with the psychologist's effectively performing his or her functions as a psychologist, or might harm or exploit the other party".
Labels: Dual-Relationships
