Ethics and Dual Relationships in Social Work, Case Study Example

Abstract

This paper establishes activities that social workers should avoid in their practice to maintain professional ethics. The activities include asking clients to lie for personal benefits, avoid discussing confidential client information, sharing opinions that are personal and not defined by their organization, and keeping off a client-to-therapist personal relationship. The findings established are that asking clients to lie jeopardizes professional integrity. Discussing clients’ confidential information with co-workers risks sharing details with individuals who know the customer, and it is not a good practice. The other finding is that failing to share personal contact with clients helps avoid unprofessional relationships. The last finding is that avoiding sharing emotional opinions is essential in preventing personal and close relationships with clients. The findings are critical in guiding social workers who wish to remain ethical and professional to know what to avoid and how to maneuver tempting situations if they occur.

Introduction

This paper describes a social work case study scenario, identifies a key example of what a therapist should not do based on an established literary theme, violated ethical codes of conduct relating to each instance, and what required to be done differently.  This topic is essential in establishing what should be avoided by a social worker who seeks to maintain professionalism in their work areas. Social workers should avoid prioritizing their gains by asking clients to lie, maintains confidentiality of customer’s information, avoid sharing personal opinions which are emotional, and practice professional relationships only. Social workers should maintain professionalism by ensuring moral and ethical judgment in their practice.

Key Terms

Personal benefit as a theme is a dual relationship that may occur when a social worker wants some personal benefit from a client (Reamer, 2003). The personal benefit may include monetary gains, items, essential services, or valuable information from the client.

Emotional and dependency needs are boundary issues that may occur when a social worker attempts to address their emotional requirement. Reamers (2003) illustrate an example of an administrative worker having an affair with a minor due to depression resulting from his collapsing marriage.

An altruistic gesture is a central theme defined by Reamers (2003) as a boundary issue that may arise due to a social worker’s effort to assist a client. Altruistic gestures are not intentional and are considered as benevolent and, at moments, motivated acts.

The unanticipated circumstance is another critical theme defined by Reamers (2003) as a boundary issue that a social worker may not expect. A key example is a social worker realizing that her client is a close friend to a colleague.

Case Study Summary

Jasmine and Juan are wife and husband, respectively. They have children named Liliana and Jose, who is a girl and boy, respectively. Liliana gets burnt one afternoon after playing with the fire outlet. Jose was at school when his sister was hurt. The mother was at home sleeping while the husband was out at work. Child Protection Service is involved in the case, and the family is directed to undertake counseling sessions. The children are sent to Jasmine’s mother. Mandy, a graduate social worker, is their therapist. Mandy is eager to help the couple. The counseling is Mandy’s first task after graduation.  Mandy tells Juan, who initially refused the urinalysis test, not to worry as it’s his first time in the system. Mandy involves in a phone conversation with Jasmine, who even invites her to family dinner. The therapist brags about her accomplishment to colleagues and ends up sharing her client’s private information. One colleague identifies the family and says they are close friends. The identification makes Mandy close the therapy session abruptly and files a report. Mandy’s supervisor invites her for a discussion about the session through email. She calls the family to ask them to accept that they achieved goals if her supervisor called to inquire. The family accepts to comply at first but later sends a text message informing her of their plan to tell the truth as they legally want custody of their children.

Ethical Issues

Asking clients to lie to satisfy personal gain

A social worker may come through a challenging condition that needs them to solve in a way that does not harm their career.  When Mandy receives an email from her supervisor requiring her to meet him and discuss a therapy session that she closed, she decides to call her clients. Mandy decides to contact her clients Juan and Jasmine to inform them that they should re-assure her supervisor by lying that they completed the therapy session successfully. The clients then agree even though they did not achieve the therapy goals because Mandy abruptly decided to close the case. The therapist’s action of asking a client to lie was unethical. The request for a client to lie to the supervisor so that she can protect her work integrity changed the client-to-therapist relationship dynamics.

Reamer’s (2003) central theme that represents a therapist asking a client to lie to her supervisor to maintain her professional integrity is personal benefit. The act of Mandy is a boundary violation of therapist to client relationship. Mandy noticed that her supervisor would call the clients in her therapy session to ask if they achieved the goals. The call by her supervisor would cause problems for her as she terminated the process before achieving set goals. The effort to call the client to lie was to protect her professional integrity by minimizing an unfortunate situation, but this was inappropriate.

The NASW (2017) code of ethics that best relates to a professional social worker taking advantage of personal gain in section 1.06 (b) prevents them from exploiting clients for personal gain. Mandy used her position to ask the family to lie. The lie was to protect her career suppose the supervisor knew that she terminated the session prematurely without achieving set goals. Making a call to ask a client to lie is beyond the professional relationship boundary. However, the therapist has not regarded this ethical violation before making the call to place the request.

A professional social worker should know that exploiting a client’s situation for personal benefit has potential danger to them (Reamer, 2003). When the therapist decided to call her clients, asking them to provide misleading information to her supervisor, it was to protect her career. The code of ethics has set standards of what should happen if social workers found themselves in a situation that would compromise their professional integrity (NASW, 2017). Mandy should have reported and sought professional guidance from her supervisor when she realized that she could not continue offering therapy. The family could have received more professional assistance.

Client’s information confidentiality

A social worker should know information types that should remain private and confidential and the one they can share. Mandy is very pleased with the therapeutic relationship that she has developed with her clients that she decides to brag about how successful she seems to her co-workers. The excitement makes her share a lot of information about the family that should remain confidential and private. One of her colleagues then suddenly claims to know the family and says that they are close friends. The statement from Mandy’s co-worker makes her suddenly feel uneasy because of exposing a lot of personal detail concerning the family. The therapists’ action is unethical because she should not have shared private information about her clients with co-workers, hence changing her relationship with the clients.

The central theme of Reamer (2003), which suites this situation, is an unanticipated circumstance. Mandy’s objective was to brag about her success, but this led to a boundary violation.  Mandy did not expect that sharing the client’s detail would lead to her colleague identifying the family and stating that they are closely related. The therapist started sharing the family information due to excitement of how successful the session was proceeding. According to Reamer (2003), an unanticipated circumstance is a relationship situation that therapists have little or no control over. Sharing client’s personal information with colleagues led to exposure.

NASW (2017) ethics of conduct outlines that therapists should never undertake a discussion of information deemed confidential through a personal level or electronically in any setting unless they can guarantee privacy in section 1.07 (i). When Mandy discussed the client’s confidential information with colleagues, she violated this code of conduct. Mandy did not know the consequence of sharing this information in a setting where she was unsure how private it would remain. The ethical code also discourages social workers from discussing confidential information in restaurants, hallways, or public gatherings.

Social workers, therefore, need to know about sharing client’s information as it may cause them harm (Reamer, 2003). The ethical code discourages making rush decisions, including termination of therapy sessions after realizing mistakes that jeopardize attaining the goal. The moral codes of conduct provide a set of actions that can follow (NASW, 2017). After learning that she had exposed her relationship with the client and also shared sensitive information about them, she could have reported to her supervisor to seek advice on whether to continue with the session or not. Reporting or consulting with the supervisor could have helped her take action, which could have helped the client.

Social worker’s emotional opinion sharing

A social worker may need to employ empathy to solve a problematic situation exhibited by clients, but this does not mean sharing personal opinions or information. Mandy, a therapist, meets Juan, who refuses to participate in urinalysis as part of the therapy goals. On the other end, Mandy feels that she likes the family and wishes to do anything to help them. Mandy decides to console Juan by telling him not to worry since it’s the first time involving the therapy procedures system. The therapist’s action of sharing an opinion on first involvement with the system is not ethical because she displays emotional attachment, changing relationship dynamics.

Reamer’s (2003) theme that suits displaying attachment by sharing personal opinions are emotional and dependency needs. Expression of emotion while attending to a client is a violation of professional boundaries between clients and therapists. The therapist assured Juan not to worry about urinalysis assessment which is part of the therapeutic goal because it was his first time. According to Reamers (2003), emotional and dependency needs are an attempt by a therapist to address their own emotional needs. However, the therapist’s objective was to try to make Juan understand the need not worrying about the test. The action of the therapist escalated the unfortunate circumstance.

According to the NASW (2017) ethics of conduct in section 1.06 (b), a social worker needs to represent the position of their organizations. The position of an organization is the one that is authorized whenever they are professionally talking on behalf of these enterprises. This code of ethics is the most relevant to this example because Mandy tried to use her emotional appeal. She should have instead made the client understand that it is a requirement based on set standards. The client is not made to understand that the procedure is a mandatory test required of him. The therapist uses her emotion to appeal to the client against organizational standards.

Social workers are expected to understand that using emotion to make clients undertake specific procedures is harmful to them (Reamer, 2003). The attempt of Mandy to appeal to Juan by telling him not to worry was to make him participate in a urinalysis test. The ethical code states that it is wrong for social workers to use their emotions to appeal to their clients (NASW, 2017). The therapist should have tried to explain to Juan why it is essential to undertake urinalysis to ensure the family gets the required assistance and meet set objectives. Following the established protocols would have led to avoidance of other personal relationships between Mandy and the family.

Social worker and client’s personal relationships

Social work requires that an individual remains professional and avoids developing a personal relationship with clients. Jasmin and Mandy develop a bond after several therapy sessions. Mandy has a work application which she should use but receives calls from Jasmin through a personal phone number. Jasmin and Mandy talk about how their day has been as the client proceeds to complain about her husband and her parents, who have their children. The relationship between Mandy and the family has grown to appoint where they invite her for dinner, and she accepts. The therapist’s action is unethical because she is involved in a personal relationship to help the family, changing the relationship dynamics.

The central theme of Reamer (2003) that suits a relationship developed due to a therapist’s effort to help a family is altruistic gestures. The relationship developed is a boundary violation. The therapists agree to talk to Jasmine over personal phone numbers, accept invitations to dinner, and stays in touch throughout the day to converse about the client’s husband and parents who are having their children.

According to NASW (2017) ethical code in section 1.06 (e), social workers are required to avoid technological communication with clients for reasons that are not related to work. The therapist agreed to talk to Jasmine over the phone call on family issues and not the therapy. The therapist even accepted an invitation to dinner not based on a scheduled therapy session. Accepting conversation over the phone and invitation to dinner is a violation of the stated ethical code.

Reamer (2003) states that the personal relationship between therapists and clients is dangerous. When the therapist accepts phone conversations which leads to a close relationship, it became painful to the clients, who later could not accept that she was leaving them. The code of ethics states possible events that can happen if a social worker develops a personal relationship with clients (NASW, 2017). The therapist should have maintained professional communication only with the client and avoid sharing personal numbers. Mandy would have avoided the situation that jeopardizes her professional practice by sticking to the protocols.

Conclusion

The findings in this document are that are that a social worker should avoid asking clients to lie for their benefit over a client’s needs by telling the truth to their supervisors if their session is jeopardized. Social workers need to avoid discussing client’s private information at any time and anywhere amongst themselves. The other finding is that social worker should also avoid sharing personal opinions and stick to what is required by their organization. A therapist should not share personal contact information and always ensure conversations are work-related. The findings are important in guiding social workers who wish to remain ethical and professional to know what to avoid and how to maneuver tempting situations if they occur. A college student establishes that asking a client to lie for personal gain jeopardizes their integrity as future social workers.  A student pursuing social work career also finds that maintaining the confidentiality of a client’s information is essential in avoiding the occurrence of circumstances that are not anticipated.  A college student understands that they should make clients understand why they are undertaking any procedure instead of sharing a personal opinion, which violates relationship boundary. Finally, a student pursuing social work career learns that a therapist needs to maintain professional relationships only with their clients to avoid altruistic gestures. The key to maintaining professionalism by social workers is to ensure moral and ethical judgment in any decision, as established in the findings in this paper.

References

National Association of Social Workers (NASW). (2017). Code of Ethics. Socialworkers.org; National Association of Social Workers. https://www.socialworkers.org/About/Ethics/Code-of-Ethics/Code-of-Ethics-English

Reamer, F. G. (2003). Boundary Issues in Social Work: Managing Dual Relationships. Social Work, 48(1), 121–133. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/48.1.121