Regulatory Complaint
Regulatory Complaints Summary
Marriage and Family
Regulatory Complaints Summary
Members from team b will critique four cases dealing with ethical violations.in order to establish boundaries. Scope of practice through risk strategies and competence, scope of practice, strategies will be analyzed and applied to the following scenarios. The specific ethical standards that were violated will also be included in regards to each case.
Case One Discussion
Case one is about a therapist who treated a client for Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) without dual diagnosis. Mariah B treated her client for more than two years when the scope of practice in treating GAD is around eight weeks. We, as a team questioned the competency in regards to the duration of therapy and the motive behind treating the client for more than two years. Was it because she had romantic ideations of her client with intentions on dating him after therapy, or was she motivated by financial gain? The legal violation occurred when the therapist began a personal relationship with her client several weeks after therapy was terminated. It is permissible to date a former client but against codes to do so within two years of formal termination. It is natural for a client to interpret the professions of an accepting treatment as a loving relationship. It is unethical for the therapist to take advantage of this vulnerability because it harms the client. Should the client awaken from his romantic-induced trance, he has the right to lodge a complaint within six months of sexual exploitation.
Case Two Discussion
This case is complicated because the intentions of the therapist are not clear. The therapist’s behavior throughout this case is questionable. Team B examined the odd behavior that the therapist displayed. This begins when he treats the client more like a friend than a client. How do we know that the client really wanted to terminate therapy or were they simply influenced or pressured by the
Marriage and Family
Regulatory Complaints Summary
Members from team b will critique four cases dealing with ethical violations.in order to establish boundaries. Scope of practice through risk strategies and competence, scope of practice, strategies will be analyzed and applied to the following scenarios. The specific ethical standards that were violated will also be included in regards to each case.
Case One Discussion
Case one is about a therapist who treated a client for Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) without dual diagnosis. Mariah B treated her client for more than two years when the scope of practice in treating GAD is around eight weeks. We, as a team questioned the competency in regards to the duration of therapy and the motive behind treating the client for more than two years. Was it because she had romantic ideations of her client with intentions on dating him after therapy, or was she motivated by financial gain? The legal violation occurred when the therapist began a personal relationship with her client several weeks after therapy was terminated. It is permissible to date a former client but against codes to do so within two years of formal termination. It is natural for a client to interpret the professions of an accepting treatment as a loving relationship. It is unethical for the therapist to take advantage of this vulnerability because it harms the client. Should the client awaken from his romantic-induced trance, he has the right to lodge a complaint within six months of sexual exploitation.
Case Two Discussion
This case is complicated because the intentions of the therapist are not clear. The therapist’s behavior throughout this case is questionable. Team B examined the odd behavior that the therapist displayed. This begins when he treats the client more like a friend than a client. How do we know that the client really wanted to terminate therapy or were they simply influenced or pressured by the