Confidentiality Is A Common Pledge When Disclosing Sensitive Personal Information

Confidentiality: Acknowledgement of the process of keeping trusted information private by the clinician, while distinguishing the reason for breaking one’s promise in keeping information secret; through written and verbal communication.

To have good ethical practice within counselling it is important that there are boundaries and contracts in place that are agreed to and understood by both the counsellor and the client.

The duty to warn and protect is the result of the Supreme Court case Tarasoff v Regents of the University of California. (Gehring 1982) In this case the courts decided that a psychotherapist having knowledge of the

Professional counselors and their staff are exposed to sensitive client information and records. The helpful receptionist and whose privilege videos, show how to apply both the American Counseling Association Code of Ethics (ACA Code of Ethics) and state board counseling laws to common ethical scenarios. The content explores aspects designed to call attention to favorable and unfavorable skills and techniques in handling such matters. These two videos demonstrate the limitations of confidentiality and privileged information. As a professional counselor one is expected to uphold the principles of confidentiality and privilege according to the ACA Code of Ethics and state laws. One may conclude that the helpful receptionist video shows clear violations of confidentiality. While the whose privilege video indicates the significance of insuring that counselors comprehend state laws and ethics codes pertaining to confidentiality and privilege. Furthermore, counseling professionals are held accountable for violating ethics codes and state laws as well as training staff on informed consent.

I selected the article “Duty to Warn and Protect: Not in Texas” for review, as it applies to the state in which I reside. The article cites Texas Health and Safety Codes, based on a 1999 Texas Supreme Court ruling that states counselors do not have a duty to warn or protect. Having a duty to warn and protect is defined as protecting clients or others from perceived harm (Jackson-Cherry & Erford, 2014). An example would be that a client tells their counselor in a confidential session that he is considering stabbing his ex-girlfriend. The duty to warn would mean the counselor should notify authorities and the ex-girlfriend thus breaking confidentiality. The duty to protect would be to admit client to a facility for the client to be assessed for a propensity for violence towards the ex-girlfriend. This became important after a 1969 incident where a counselor, had a client expressed harm towards a girl and the counselor contacted the authorities, yet never contacted the girl, who was subsequently killed by the client a few months later, known as the Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California case (Jackson-Cherry & Erford, 2014).

This paper is a response to a video discussing the issues of confidentiality, privilege, reporting, and duty to warn. This paper looks at these issues and their explanations in the American Counseling Association Code of Ethics as well as the Georgia State Board of Professional Counselor’s ethical guidelines and provides a commentary on the laws. It was found that these issues are not always black and white, but there is some debate on these issues. Confidentiality is both an ethical and a legal responsibility yet there are often times when the ethical demands clash with the legal demands. This paper explores some of those crashes and explains what I have learned from the video and the professional and stage guidelines concerning confidentiality and its implications and how I will apply what I have learned into future practice.

Castledine, G., 2010. Limitations of confidentiality, British Journal of Nursing, [e-journal] 19 (2), Available through: Anglia Ruskin University Library website [Ac

Video presentation: The video clip was quite interesting I found it to be very educational as to the legal obligations of therapists in the mental health field. There were issues that were brought up that were quite important, such as therapists need to understand confidentiality, privileged information, and a therapists responsibility related to reporting suspected child abuse, elder abuse, and/or suicidal ideations, and possibly the most important of them all is a therapists duty to warn. The first case they were

There are several ethical dilemmas that the mental health professionals that are working as a team will face including “ensuring that the client has given informed consent, maintaining client confidentiality, and involving professionals, paraprofessionals, and family in appropriate coordinated processes that benefit the client” (Paproski & Haverkamp, 2000, p.96).

The situation is the decision to breach the confidentiality between a client and his patient. The therapist has to decide if the client will pose a threat to himself or any other 3rd party, or society as a whole. If the therapist feels in any way that the client could be a threat, he has the right to notify the person or the correct officials to insure that no harm comes to anyone involved.

Tarasoff versus Regents of the University of California (1974) a court case which Tatiana Tarasoff, a University of California Berkeley’s student was killed. Prosenjit Poddar pursued Tatiana while she was alone in her home. He started the aggression in her home and chased into the street and stabbed her seventeen times causing her death. Previously he described his intentions and depression when he asked Dr. Laurence Moore at Berkeley medical center. The diagnosed of paranoid schizophrenia was presented by the doctor. Dr. Moore felt the risk against Tarasoff and shared the situation with two other doctors and determined that Poddar should be committed to a psychiatric hospital and to the police. Poddar was release after he promised to stay away from her. She never received any alert about her risks by the doctor or pilice. Poddar killed her on the night of October 27, 1969. During the criminal trial he pleaded not guilty because of his insanity. His prior evaluation to the murder presented evidence that Poddar was no guilty because of his mental state because he was insane and demonstrated a paranoid schizophrenia. He came back to India and had a normal life. Tarasoff’s family sued the doctors and police. The charges against the police were dropped because the police were immune to the suit. It was consider that the psychiatrics failed in their duty to warn and protect Tatiana.

When it comes to confidentiality there are rules that one has to follow in order to abide by the person’s rights. Using caution when talking to others about the client who want to obtain information that they are not at liberty to have. An example of this would be someone claiming to be a patient’s friend wanting a room number in the hospital to go visit them. Confidentiality is a very delicate situation in the practicing field of professionals.

When mental health counselors work with various clients during their career, they need to practice confidentiality and privacy when conducting one-on-one, group, or any type of counseling services. Like any medical patient, mental health clinicians need to treat their clients with dignity and respect. It is extremely important for the mental health counselor working with his or her assigned caseload

Health care professionals are subject to a multitude of professional, legal, and ethical responsibilities which call for personal judgment to be utilized in such a manner as to protect clients as well as public wellness and interests. Overall considerations in handling such duties may be considered to be respect of a client’s autonomy, confidence, and recognition of obligations owed to all clients. While the aforementioned acts fall within the professional realm, there are also legal implications that guide care. Therefore, it can be said that ethical considerations occur in observation of legal responsibilities. Confidential information is perceived as private facts which are disclosed with the

The supervisor is ultimately liable for the welfare of the supervisee’s clients. The supervisee is expected to discuss with the supervisor the counseling process and individual concerns of each client. Inform supervisor immediately of any of the following incidents: restraint, violence to themselves or others, suicidal thoughts, breach of appropriate boundaries, violations of confidentiality and/or clients rights, any disclosure of abuse or neglect. The supervisor must be available by phone, web-camera, or in person to answer clinical questions that correspond directly to the clients’