Dual Role Relationships

The purpose of this study was to examine and understand the types of activities viewed as either ethical or unethical by psychologists practicing in different settings and orientation. Psychologists from the district of Hilo, Hawaii completed questionnaire and survey concerning the behaviors and acts that lead practitioners to engage in dual roles with client. Measures included demographic questionnaire and the Therapeutic Practices Survey. The participants rated the degree or level to which each behavior or act was ethical. A majority believed dual role behaviors to be unethical under most conditions and some reported that they have rarely or never engage in such behaviors. The profession and practice setting did not vary among terms of involvements, which includes incidental, social/financial, and dual roles. A review of previous studies and literature assisted in revealing the nature of relationships, ethical guidelines provided, and limits of boundaries for relationships. This study offers data to support the need for awareness of activities and behaviors leading to dual roles and the settings of practitioners most at risk.

In clinical practice it is wise for mental health professionals to monitor boundary crossing or multiple relationships. These roles have the potential for therapist to use power inappropriately through influence or exploitation of clients. Therefore it is essential to continually monitor the impact of the behavior on clients (Corey et al., 2011). From ethical perspective dual relationships in its self is not a malpractice. The legal aspect depends on the nature of the relationships.

Most major professional codes of ethics have a policy or rule against dual relationships (Gottlieb, 1993). Dual relationships exist when a professional acts at the same time or sequentially in two roles (Gottlieb, 1993). Through the course of this paper, the concept of dual relationships will be examined. Ethical issues with dual relationships will be explained as well as the clarification and analyzation of a specific dual relationship. Not to mention the explanation of challenges presented by boundary issues in professional psychology.

Dual Relationships are dangerous to the client/counselor relationship since it blurs boundaries that must be clear to have a successful, ethical relationship that is centered on the client. A dual relationship can blur the boundaries since other relationships you have with the client will not only not have the clear balance of power that the counselor/client relationship has but will also not have the objectivity and client-centered relationship you must have with them. If you have one relationship with a client as their counselor and another as peer, your relationship with them as a peer can seep into your role as their counselor. In the case of dual relationships, the rule of thumb is “the fewer roles, the better” (p. 565).

Interventions and strategies that I would be use for preventing dual relationships in supervisory would be to implement a policy that abides by the NASW Code of Ethic, providing training, having mandatory meeting, and continuing educations for the supervisees. The training should consist risk management skills, how to maintain a healthy relationships with supervisees and clients, how to handle boundary violations, and how to make ethical decisions. The clinical should implement a conceptual framework that will help the supervisee’s recognize and manage dual relationships when they arise. The clinical supervisor should bring awareness to the problem by informing the supervisees on the latest interventions and research that provide a better

The APA code of ethics general principles intent is to guide and inspire psychologist toward the highest ethical standards of the profession. The five basic principles are beneficence and nonmaleficence, fidelity and responsibility, integrity, justice, and respect for people’s rights and dignity.

Counselors within their specialty are part of interdisciplinary teams’ work. The ACA code of ethics provide several standards that tackle responsibilities to acquire and strengthen relationship with colleague to best serve clients (D.1.b); to focus on the wellbeing of client (D.1.c); and to clarify professional role, parameters of confidentiality, and ethical responsibilities of the team and its members (D.1.d, D.1.e).

Dual relationships and the ethical behavior that revolves around boundaries with clients present a multitude of very complicated situations to counselors where a clearly defined course of action is not always evident. Aside from no accord amongst mental health professionals and boundary issues being unavoidable at times, recognition and prediction of potential benefits or pitfalls correlated with dual relationships can prove to be troublesome as well (Remley & Herlihy, 2010). For most cases, it is best if an outline is used to discern when it is appropriate for a counselor to breach the client-counselor boundary.

For that reason, in the mental health professions, dual relationships are generally not recommended. Thus, if your friend who’s a psychologist assumes two more roles consecutively with a client, this is considered a dual relationship. For instance, if an individual held a role as a counselor and business partner, or client and friend, this is a considered a dual relationship. Common examples of dual relationships include: bartering therapy for goods or services; providing

Therapy relationships with clients. The psychologist to patient relationship during therapy is a crucial aspect. It is within ethical guidelines that the psychologist clearly establish his role whether it be with an individual, group, or family therapist. These roles need to be understood for the variety of issues that may arise; one of which is the disclosure of information. Psychologists, for obvious reasons, are not to have sexual relationships with patients or former patients within a

Misconduct on the part of the counselor may result in legal action in the civil and criminal courts if a counselor engages in a sexual relationship with a client. Companies may also have policies that outline conduct with regard to sexual relationships and violating such policies may result in sanctions or termination by the employer (Hotelling, 1988).

Eric Erikson, was well know for his different types of stages of personality, which was call, “Psychosocial Stages of Personality Development.” One stage which I would be looking at is “Identity Cohesion versus Role Confusion.” This is the stage occurs during the adolescence stage, which is from twelve through eighteen years of age. However, with this stage the adolescence searches for his or her identify, goals, beliefs and personal values. Children who are at this stage is all about finding themselves. Therefore, they just want to fit in with society. Now as for a doctor performing some type of surgery on my child’s brain, to ensure he would be heterosexuality, the answer would be, no. Same would go for my daughters.

Dual relationships occur when a practitioner is in a professional role with a client as well as taking on another role outside the clinic with the client. The professional needs to assess the risk in the relationship and whether both the practitioner and the client can differentiate between a boundary crossing and a boundary violation. In rural area’s a dual relationship may be unavoidable, the article discuses that the practitioner may have been chosen because of the prior relationship, and that some form of prior relationship may even be a prerequisite for the development of trust and respect in a small community. However, Zur also writes about the “Slippery Slope Effect” in which that all boundary crossings eventually lead to sexual relationships and boundary violations. The author then notes that the slippery slope effect is an unreasonable link and adds that when thinking of crossing a boundary the professional needs to consider the welfare of the client and benefits to treatments, whilst avoiding harm or exploitation and to respect the client’s autonomy (Zur 2004, pp27-32).

In this case, the psychologist is presented with several ethical issues which could cause harm to the client. The first ethical issue that arose in this case is the potential for a role conflict. The psychologist and Mr. Hartwig had contact prior to the development of a therapeutic relationship when the psychologist bought a car from Mr. Hartwig. It may not be enough that the brief, informal relationship ended. The psychologist must assess the dimensions of the previous relationship from the viewpoint of the client as well as his/her own personal feelings (Koocher & Keith-Spiegel, 2008). For example, the client could feel that he gave the psychologist a good deal and that the psychologist was indebted to him. This could leave the

When discussing the importance of professional boundaries in mental health work, most people think first of relationships between psychotherapists and clients. However, similar boundary considerations are relevant for professor–student relationships, supervisor–supervisee relationships, consultant–consultee relationships, and researcher–participant relationships. Although different dynamics are at play, the relationships psychologists have with each other, with other professionals, and with the general public have boundaries that warrant ethical consideration as well. The American Psychological Association (APA) offers some guidance. The APA Ethics Code says, in Standard 7.07: "Psychologists do not engage in sexual relationships with