Boundary issues

One of the most important ethical problems in social work involves boundary difficulties. Social workers must have a solid understanding of what constitutes appropriate behaviour that implies professionalism and protects both the client and the professional. This is why ethical concerns like this one are crucial. Thus, topics relating to boundary violations, boundary crossings, and the appropriate handling of occurrences that establish ethical and unethical conduct in social work are explored in the case study review. Three of the five ideas from the category of dual relationships’ defining characteristics and boundary-related concerns in social work are also applied in this article. Personal benefit, intimacy, and altruistic gestures are some of the areas that a social worker need s to consider in dealing with dual relationships and subsequent ethical issues that surround these aspects as related to professional conduct and relationships with clients. The NASW Code of Ethics is also used in identifying the appropriate manner in which professional in the field need to act ethically.

Introduction

Ethical issues in social work revolve around various issues but it has been established that boundary issues constitute some of the most challenging problems that professionals in the field have to deal with. As is evident in the case study, dual relationships are among the boundary problems that a social worker may face. In this respect, a social worker must have a better comprehension of the ethics that underlie the management of dual relationships if he or she is to conduct practice in an ethical way. In this case, the new therapist has been assigned a client in the form of a troubled teenage girl who requires counseling. However, the girl’s father happens to be the boss to the therapist’s wife. In addition, there have been some contact between the client and the therapist that require evaluation as they portend boundary violation which may present a problem to both the therapist, the client and the other people involved. Boundary issues entail conditions where a social work professional comes across situations that may present conflict between their professional responsibilities and other aspects of life such as social, business, or sexual relationships. Boundary issues happen when social workers face possible conflicts of interest in form of dual relationships as evidenced in this case. Dual relationships happen when a social worker engages with a client in more than one relationship as is also witnessed in the case study. These may result in boundary violations, which refer to relationships featuring factors such as coercion, exploitation, manipulation, and deception among other factors. It may also involve boundary crossings where the dual relationship is not intentionally harmful to the client but may come with negative implications as witnessed in the case. This paper is thus going to examine the ethical problems in the case in relation to the formation of dual relationships, boundary violation, and boundary crossing against the NASW Code of Ethics. In as much as not all boundary issues are problematic, dual relationship as evident in this case is not ethical.

Body

When the client, Angel first arrives for her appointment with the therapist, she is the company of her stepfather who introduces himself to the therapist. The therapist realized that the client’s father was his wife’s direct supervisor at the restaurant where the wife worked. He however fails to mention this relationship to either the client or the client’s father. The failure to mention this connection to the client or the client’s father constitutes the formation of the dual relationship that is evident in the case. This failure to mention the relationship constitutes a boundary violation on the part of the therapist. As Reamer notes, boundary violations happen when the practitioner engages in a dual relationship with a client that is exploitative, deceptive, or even manipulative. Since the therapist was eager to build a caseload, the relationship was based on deception as he was advancing his own benefit. Personal benefit is among the five concepts underlying dual relationships and it is evident in this case. The therapist’s need to build a caseload and make more money was the primary drivers that influenced his decision not to reveal the possible conflict of interest and the dual relationship with his client. A Boundary violation like this one is thus unethical.

The NASW Code of Ethics establishes that social workers need to be alert to avoid conflict of interest that may interfere with their professional discretion and neutral judgment. Additionally, it states that social workers should notify clients when a prospective or actual conflict of interest arises and take the rational steps to resolve the issue in a way that prioritizes the protection and the interests of the client. By failing to notify the client of the probability of a conflict of interest, the therapist in this case acted in an unethical way and failed to adhere to the professional code of ethics. He prioritized his needs above those of the client in as much as he was aware of the potential boundary issues involved before he began therapy with Angel as the client.

When the client failed to show up for the scheduled appointment of the week, the therapist called her using his personal number. When she calls back after he left her a message, she is hysterical and distressed. He decides to go over to where the client was with the idea of helping. He then takes her out to a nearby restaurant and uses his money to buy her dinner. These instances establish the formation of a dual relationship featuring boundary crossing. By calling the client using his personal line, the therapist initiated a relationship outside the confines of professionalism. Additionally, taking the client out also fell out of his professional boundary and instead into a more social realm which is consistent with boundary crossing. Reamer explains that boundary crossings happen when a professional gets involved in a dual relationship with the client in a manner that is not intended to harm. In his actions, the therapist did not intentionally call the client with ill motives of deception, manipulation or exploitation. He was genuinely concerned and wanted to help but he crossed the boundary nevertheless. Reamer further explains that boundary crossings though not necessarily unethical may be harmful in cases where the dual relationship has undesirable consequences for the client and even the therapist himself. In this particular case, the boundary crossing and the dual relationship had a negative result as the therapist in his good intentions confuses Angel on the nature of their relationship.

Intimacy is one of the five themes of social work that is applicable to this case. Dual relationships have an aspect of intimacy as seen through this particular case. The client Angel give the therapist a gift to thank him for being there after the incidence of calling and taking her to dinner with the intention of actually helping her. The NASW Code of Ethics notes that social workers should not engage in physical contact with their clients and should set clear, suitable, and socially sensitive boundaries to manage any form of contact. The therapist’s failure to state the nature of relationship after Angel gives him a hug and a kiss constitutes unethical conduct on his part. He should have realized that by crossing the boundary and establishing a relationship that could be construed by the client as social; there was possibility of confusion on the part of the client.

Reamer notes that some boundary issues arise from the social worker’s genuine efforts to be of help. This falls under the theme of altruistic gestures as is evident in this case. When the therapist decides to help Angel and her friend who are seeking work in the neighborhood to raise some money, he is doing so with the genuine interest of just being helpful and has no ulterior motives. However, Reamer further explains that in as much this may not be unethical, careful management of such situations are needed. The Code of Ethics establishes that in situations where dual relationships are unavoidable, it I the responsibility of the social worker to set clear and appropriate boundaries so that possible harm may be minimized. When he allows the girls including his client to come inside the house due to his fear of not wanting to seem cold, the therapist in this case failed to set the boundaries that would characterize future relationship with the client. He also offers a bit of personal information when Angel asked about his divorce. This may have formed the basis for the step she took to come to his house later that evening.

Conclusion

The numerous instances underlying this case study make it easy to have a conceptualization of boundary issues as related to dual relationships. Evaluating the case study against Reamer’s article further establishes a better understanding of the various ways in which dual relationships are formed and the ethical issues that may arise from the response or the conduct of the social work professional. The Code of Ethics as applied in the case study aids the identification of ethical and unethical conduct as related to dual relationships and issues of boundary. Through the case study, identification and conceptualization of what constitutes boundary violations and boundary crossing help with understanding the various ways through which proper management of these issues should be approached. In most of these instances in the case study, the therapist failed to manage the issues appropriately which further strengthens the position that dual relationships are unethical as stated by the initial position of the paper. However, dual relationships are not always negative but the propensity for being unethical is high and thus should be avoided by any social worker.

Bibliography

Pugh, Richard. “Dual relationships: Personal and professional boundaries in rural social work.” British Journal of Social Work 37, no. 8 (2007): 1405-1423.

Reamer, Frederic G. “Boundary issues in social work: Managing dual relationships.” Social work 48, no. 1 (2003): 121-133.