Social worker dating client

The issue here is whether or not the therapist/client relationship truly lasts in The NASW Code of Ethics, Section (a), prohibits social workers from.
Table of contents

It would depend on the context. However, when a therapist and long past patient enter into a relationship separate from the therapeutic one, is that actually a dual relationship? Would it be more accurate to call it a sequential or serial relationship? Is there a difference? If one believes that our patients grow mature and sometimes surpass us in knowledge, wisdom, and power, then it is a significant difference. Of course, of all the dual or sequential relationships that are potentially possible with patients and former patients, when the issue of sex comes up, most all therapists of all disciplines react forcefully.

Having sex with a current patient or even a recently discharged patient is not only unethical—it is illegal.

It is truly a betrayal of the trust the patient places in us. However, over time as in years , can that change in some very special circumstances to allow exceptions to the rule? If a therapist and former patient meet some 10 or 15 years after the last therapeutic session and develop a personal relationship, get married, and have children, can we say that an ethical violation or a crime has been committed? In most all states, laws prohibiting sex with clients are limited to current or recent clients. Washington State is one exception. However, assuming the former client does not file any complaint, how enforceable would such laws be?

For example, what if the former therapist and patient got married, were in a committed relationship, and had children? Would or should an ethics committee have the authority to interfere with a marriage or union among consenting adults? What about our belief in the right to free association? What is the rationale for the prohibition against sex with patients? Many believe it is the power differential.

Behnke points out that many relationships have significant power differentials, including partnerships and marriages, and that we often do in fact put our own interests above those of clients when we charge fees, for example. So, neither a power differential nor putting our own needs first is in and of itself unethical.

Rather, Behnke says, it is because we have a fiduciary relationship that is compromised and creates additional risks that are not a necessary part of the therapeutic relationship, making psychotherapy impossible.

Case study

But fiduciary relationships are not static and change with time and circumstances. Some would argue it is based on psychodynamic theory, and perhaps those who practice psychoanalytically have a higher standard. But interestingly, there is nothing in psychodynamic theory or psychoanalysis that would state such.

This would include taking patients on vacation and conducting analysis in hotel room beds. We tend to forget that that was a different time with different standards. Therefore, perhaps, our reactions could possibly be a way of denying and reacting against the behaviors of a previous era we find frankly embarrassing and indefensible. Another possibility is that, whereas all of us require structure of some kind, some of us need more structure and clear inflexible rules more than others.

Some fear that if they bend the rules just a little, they may go down a slippery slope and cross all reasonable bounds. To therapists who believe they are just one rigid rule away from harming their patients, I say maintain all the rules you need. However, not everyone requires such inflexibility. Attempting to impose such rigidity on everyone is not good practice. It is not good for our clients or the field. The attention turned into a friendship and eventually an affair.

But the social worker was a domineering Christian fundamentalist who sought to convert Aisha and stop her taking her medication. When she objected, he said he had the power to take away her children. Aisha's ordeal is one of a growing number of cases of social workers found to have formed inappropriate relationships with their clients, which has led to disciplinary action, including dismissal and removal from the professional register. The General Social Care Council GSCC , social work's regulators for England, will on Monday respond to the trend by publishing guidance on observing what it calls "professional boundaries".

'Til Death Do Us Part: Does a Client Ever Stop Being a Client?

Social workers, it will say, need to take particular care to ensure their support for vulnerable clients does not develop into something more. Penny Thompson, the GSCC chief executive, said the guidance was "not a list of do's and don'ts" but was designed to stimulate reflection and discussion around a series of cases that had been heard by the body's conduct committee. There were grey areas in a social worker's dealings with a client that did not apply to other caring professions, Thompson said. That's the basis for making an assessment of how they are and what needs to happen or change.

The GSCC, which regulates almost , social workers and social work students, says the number being disciplined for inappropriate relationships is relatively small: However, these cases represent almost one in five of all misconduct findings in that period.

Facing Up to Social Worker Sexual Misconduct

By contrast, one in 27 of all fitness-to-practise cases heard last year by the General Medical Council involved an alleged improper relationship between a doctor and a patient. She had the children to stay with her while their mother was in hospital. Historically, sexual misconduct accounts for a significant percentage of ethics complaints and lawsuits filed against social workers.

Other circumstances involve more subtle boundary issues in which social workers may disagree about the appropriateness of the dual or multiple relationship. For example, to what extent is it appropriate for social workers to share personal information with clients i. Is judicious self-disclosure acceptable in some circumstances?

What about contact between social workers and clients in social settings? Would it be appropriate for a social worker to serve with a client on a church committee that they both joined coincidentally? Contemporary research on boundary issues suggests that social workers face several major issues, including the following:. The most extreme cases involve sexual intimacy. However, there are other forms as well. Under what circumstances, for example, is it appropriate for social workers to hug a client? Is there a distinction between a brief good-bye hug at the end of long-term treatment and a more sustained hug with a client who is distraught about a life crisis?

Or, is it ever appropriate for a social worker to send personal notes to clients, give clients gifts for example, when a client marries or delivers a baby , or accept gifts from clients?