Tag Archives: Ethics

Ohio Counselors, Social Workers and MFTs

Posted on by

By Gina Ulery

Continuing Education & License Renewal Requirements

OHCSWMFTThirty Clock Hours of continuing education are required for all license renewals every two years from the date of licensure. Three of the thirty hours must cover ETHICS. Ethics CEUs may or may not contain the word ethics in the title or description. Some CEUs cover ‘ethical subjects’ , such as: productivity, documentation, termination, HIPPA, boundary concerns, cultural diversity, human trafficking and some types of supervision.

Supervision:

  • LPCC-S & LPC-S counselors holding the supervising counselor designation must complete 3 hours of supervisory training per renewal cycle. This type of supervision needs to be focused on training that will help supervisor to help their supervisees (counselor trainees and clinical residents) to gain the experience required for licensure as a professional counselor or professional clinical counselor, and to improve their own skills as a supervising counselor. ref. 4757-9-02(A)
  • LISW-S holding the supervising designation must complete 3 hours of supervisory training per renewal cycle This type of supervision needs to be focused on training supervision of LSW’s working toward their two years of supervised practice or SWTs in their field work. TIP: supervision should contain content that includes the: supervisor, supervisee and the client. ref: 475709-03(D) / 4757-23-01 paragraph (E)(3)(b)
  • IMFT-S All supervising independent marriage and family therapists shall maintain supervisory status by obtaining five hours in an AAMFT approved supervision refresher course or equivalent supervision course every five years. ref. 4757-29-01 (F)(4)

 

Online (Distance Learning) CE Allowed:

  • Social workers may complete 30 hours of distance learning training for each renewal.
  • Counselors may only complete 15 hours of distance learning training for each renewal.

 

A 20% discount will automatically deduct at checkout for all Ohio-licensed Counselors, Social Workers and MFTs. If for any reason it doesn’t, enter coupon code PDRPC196 to apply. Coupon expires 12/31/2015.

Professional Development Resources is approved as a provider of continuing education by the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB Provider #1046, ACE Program); by the National Board of Certified Counselors (NBCC Provider #5590); by the American Psychological Association (APA); and by the *Ohio Counselor, Social Worker and Marriage & Family Therapist Board (Provider #RCST100501). *Ohio Counselors & MFTs: check CE accreditation statement for specific course approval – if Ohio is not listed, the course is not approved.

Indiana Psychologists Continuing Education and License Renewals

Posted on by

indiana psychologists continuing education
Indiana-licensed psychologists have a biennial license renewal with an August 31st deadline, even years. Forty (40) hours of continuing education are required for license renewal. Of the forty hours, a minimum of twenty (20) hours are required from Category 1, six (6) hours of Ethics is required, and three (3) hours must be Category 1. Thirty (30) hours (10 hours Category 1, 20 hours Category 2) are allowed from home study if APA approved.

Professional Development Resources is approved by the American Psychological Association (APA) to sponsor continuing education for psychologists. Professional Development Resources maintains responsibility for all programs and content.

Requirements for Continuing Education

Psychologists licensed in the state of Indiana have a license renewal every two years with an August 31st deadline, even years. 40 hours of continuing education are required in order to renew a license. Of the forty hours, a minimum of 20 hours are required from Category 1, 6 hours of Ethics is required, and 3 hours must be Category 1. 30 hours (10 hours Category 1, 20 hours Category 2) are allowed from home study if APA approved.

Continuing Education Courses for Psychologists

 

New Online Course Meets Ethics Requirement for RDs & DTRs

Posted on by

By Gina Ulery, MS, RDN, LDN

Responding to a recommendation from the Academy Board of Directors, on May 9, 2011, the Commission on Dietetic Registration (CDR) voted to require that RDs and DTRs complete a minimum of 1 CPEU of Continuing Professional Education in Ethics (Learning Need Code 1050) during each 5-year recertification cycle in order to recertify. This requirement will be effective starting with the 5-year recertification cycle which ends on May 31, 2017, and will be phased in over a 5 year period for each recertification cycle.

Professional Development Resources has developed a 1-hour online course to meet this requirement:

Ethics for Registered Dietitian NutritionistsEthics for Registered Dietitian Nutritionists is a 1-hour online continuing education (CE, CEU, CPEU) course addressing the ethics of practice in nutrition and dietetics and satisfies the requirement of the Commission on Dietetic Registration that RDs and DTRs complete a minimum of 1 CPEU of Continuing Professional Education in Ethics (Learning Need Code 1050) during each 5-year recertification cycle in order to recertify. The practice and business of nutrition and dietetics grow and change but ethical practices remain paramount regardless. Potential situations arise that require a review of what the ethical solution(s) should be. This course includes real-life scenarios so you can utilize the profession’s Code of Ethics to identify these ethical issues and come up with solutions and ways to avoid unethical behaviors. Course #10-60 | 2014 | 10 Pages | 7 posttest questions

This online course provides instant access to the course materials (PDF download) and CE test. Successful completion of the online CE test (80% required to pass, 3 chances to take) and course evaluation are required to earn a certificate of completion. You can print the test (download test from My Courses tab of your account after purchasing) and mark your answers on while reading the course document. Then submit online when ready to receive credit.

About the Authors:

Catherine Christie, PhD, RDN, LDN, FAND, FPCNA, is Associate Dean, Professor, and Nutrition Graduate Program Director in the Brooks College of Health at the University of North Florida. She is a Past President of the Florida Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics and currently serves on the Board of Directors of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. Cathy is co-author of four books including The Latino Food Lover’s Glossary, Fat is Not Your Fate, Eat to Stay Young and I’d Kill for a Cookie. Dr. Christie is also Editor of theManual of Medical Nutrition Therapy. A Registered Dietitian Nutritionist, Fellow of the Preventative Cardiovascular Nurses Association and Fellow of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, Dr. Christie earned her Ph.D. from Florida State University and served for six years as the Chairman of the Dietetics and Nutrition Council, which regulates the nutrition profession in the state of Florida. Dr. Christie is the recipient of several awards and/or certifications including Florida’s Distinguished Dietitian, Florida Dietetic Association Outstanding Service Award, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Outstanding Dietetic Educator Award, and the Excellence in Practice Award for Education in Nutrition and Dietetics.

Susan Mitchell, PhD, RDN, LDN, FAND, is a nutrition consultant in digital and traditional media and communicates evidence-based health messages thru social media, radio, TV, video, and print. ?She also provides continuing education for health professionals through speaking, webinars and written articles/courses. Along with Dr. Christie, Dr. Mitchell is co-author of three books, Fat is Not Your Fate, I’d Kill for a Cookie, and Eat to Stay Young and is a contributing author to Macmillan Reference USA’s Nutrition and Well-Being A to Z. A Registered Dietitian Nutritionist, Fellow of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, and Distinguished Florida Dietitian, Dr. Mitchell earned her Ph.D. from the University of Tennessee and taught nutrition and health science at the University of Central Florida for over 8 years. She serves on the University of North Florida’s Department of Nutrition & Dietetics Advisory Committee and the advisory board of Family Circle magazine. Drs. Christie and Mitchell have taught the Preventing Medical Errors in Dietetics Practice 2-hour course for over six years at the annual Florida Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics meeting.

Professional Development Resources is a CPE Accredited Provider with the Commission on Dietetic Registration (CDR #PR001). CPE accreditation does not constitute endorsement by CDR of provider programs or materials. Professional Development Resources is also a provider with the Florida Council of Dietetics and Nutrition and is CE Broker compliant (#50-1635).

Multiple Relationships Not Always Bad

Posted on by

By Ofer Zur, PhD

Entering into dual relationships with psychotherapy patients has been a topic of significant controversy in professional psychology. Although these types of extratherapeutic alliances have generally been considered to be unethical conduct, some authors recently have supported their development as both ethical and, in some cases, even therapeutic.

I was surprised to read the statement of my esteemed colleague, Ed Zuckerman, PhD, in the last issue of The National Psychologist (Nov/Dec, 2011), whereas part of an article on “The Fiduciary Heart of Ethics“ he stated, “We have an ethical obligation to avoid multiple relationships.”

This statement is in contrast to the APA’s code of ethics, (Section 3.05), which clearly states that: “A psychologist refrains from entering into a multiple relationship if the multiple relationship could reasonably be expected to impair the psychologist’s objectivity, competence or effectiveness in performing his or her functions as a psychologist or otherwise risks exploitation or harm to the person with whom the professional relationship exists.”

Multiple relationships not always badMultiple relationships not reasonably expected to cause impairment or risk exploitation or harm are not unethical.

Zuckerman’s statement and discussion of multiple relationships are not only incorrect, unsupported and outdated, but also are in clear contrast to the standard of care of psychotherapy and counseling. For example, multiple relationships are mandated in military settings where psychologists often have primary loyalty to the Department of Defense and only a secondary loyalty to the person they are treating in the consulting room. Multiple relationships are inherent in some correctional settings, such as prisons, where psychologists have a responsibility to the security of the institution, as well as to the mental health of actual patients.

Zuckerman, who to the best of my knowledge, lives in Pennsylvania, should be aware that multiple relationships are unavoidable in small communities and rural areas, which are quite prevalent in his state. In fact, they are a normal and healthy part of such interconnected communities. Familiarity and multiple relationships between all members of small communities, including health care providers, is how such communities survive and thrive.

Not all multiple relationships are created equal. There are different types of multiple relationships:

  • A social multiple relationship is one in which a therapist and client are also friends, acquaintances or have some other type of social relationship within their community.
  • A professional multiple relationship is where a psychotherapist/counselor and client, are also professional colleagues in colleges or training institutions, presenters in professional conferences, co-authors of a book, or other situations that create professional multiple relationships.
  • Institutional multiple relationships take place in the military, prisons, some police departments and mental hospitals where multiple relationships are an inherent part of the institutional settings.
  • Forensic multiple relationships involve clinicians who serve as treating therapists, evaluators and witnesses in trials or hearings.
  • Supervisory relationships inherently involve multiple relationships and multiple loyalties. A supervisor has a professional relationship and duty to the supervisee and to the client, as well as to the profession.
  • A sexual multiple relationship is where a therapist and client are also involved in a sexual relationship.

–
Sexual multiple relationships with current clients are always unethical. A business multiple relationship is generally ill-advised. These are relationships, in which a therapist and client are business partners or have an employer-employee relationship.

Multiple relationships can be ethical or unethical, legal or illegal, and can be avoidable, unavoidable or mandated. They can also be planned and anticipated or unexpected. Then they can be concurrent or sequential and can also very with different levels of involvement, from low/minimal to intense.

In summary:

  • Non-sexual multiple relationships are not necessarily unethical or illegal.
  • Multiple relationships can’t be avoided in many settings and are mandated in others.
  • Multiple relationships are a healthy part of small and rural communities.
  • Sexual multiple relationships with current clients are always unethical.

–
Non-sexual multiple relationships do not necessarily lead to exploitation, sex or harm. The opposite can be true. Multiple relationships can reduce isolation and prevent exploitation rather than lead to it. Almost all professional association codes of ethics do not mandate a blanket avoidance of multiple relationships.

Source: Ethics & Risk Management: Expert Tips VI

Oklahoma Social Workers Continuing Education and License Renewals

Posted on by

oklahoma social workers continuing education and license renewalsOklahoma-licensed social workers have an annual license renewal with a deadline of December 31st. Sixteen (16) continuing education hours are required to renew a license. Of the sixteen hours, eight hours must be Category 3, and the other eight hours must be live. National accreditation accepted is ASWB, and three (3) hours of ethics are required at each renewal.

Continuing education ensures the best possible standards for the social work profession. All licensees to participate in continuing education as a licensing condition.

This organization (Professional Development Resources, Inc. ACE Approval Number 1046) is approved as a provider for social work continuing education by the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB) www.aswb.org through the Approved Continuing Education (ACE) Program. Professional Development Resources maintains responsibility for all programs. ASWB Approval Period: 6/12/2000 – 6/12/2016. Social workers should contact their regulatory board to determine course approval for continuing education credits.

Continuing Education Requirements

Social workers licensed in Oklahoma have a yearly license renewal with a December 31st deadline. Sixteen continuing education hours are required to renew a license. Of the sixteen hours, eight hours must be Category 3, and the other eight hours must be live. National accreditation accepted is ASWB, and three hours of ethics are required at each renewal.

Information gathered from the Oklahoma Board of Licensed Social Workers on December 18, 2013.

 

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta

North Carolina Marriage and Family Therapists Continuing Education and License Renewals

Posted on by

north carolina marriage and family therapists continuing educationNorth Carolina-licensed marriage and family therapists have an annual license renewal with a June 30th deadline. Twenty (20) hours of continuing education are required in order to renew a license. All twenty hours are allowed from home study. Three hours of ethics are required at each renewal, and continuing education units are accepted by the board if the title and content relate to the marriage and family therapy profession. Learn more about our three hour ethics course for marriage and family therapists.

The main reason for continuing education is to assure the highest possible standards for the marriage and family therapy profession. All licensees are required to participate in continuing education as a licensing condition.

Professional Development Resources is approved as a provider of continuing education by the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB Provider #1046, ACE Program); by the National Board of Certified Counselors (NBCC Provider #5590); by the American Psychological Association (APA); and by the National Association of Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Counselors (NAADAC, Provider #000279).

Continuing Education Requirements

North Carolina-licensed marriage and family therapists have an annual license renewal with a June 30th deadline. Twenty (20) hours of continuing education are required to renew a license, and there are no limits on home study. Three hours of professional ethics are required at each renewal, and continuing education hours are accepted by the board if the title and content relate to the marriage and family therapy profession.

Information obtained from the North Carolina Marriage and Family Therapy Licensure Board on May 30, 2013.

 

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta

Texting or Friending Patients Frowned Upon in New Professional Guidelines

Posted on by

By Robert Preidt

Doctors Urged to Refrain from Social Media Contacts With PatientsIn this age of texting, tweets and Facebook “friends,” doctors should show restraint when it comes to reaching out to patients through social media, new guidelines say.

Updated recommendations for online ethics from the American College of Physicians (ACP) and the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) say the key is drawing a clear line between professional life and social life.

If physicians fail to do so, the “potential dangers are confidentiality concerns, replacement of face-to-face or phone interaction, and ambiguity or misinterpretation of digital interactions,” the American College of Physicians said in a news release.

Some of the key recommendations:

  • Doctors should not contact or “friend” patients through personal social media such as Facebook.
  • Text-messaging should not be used for passing along medical information except when there is patient consent. Even then, doctors should use “extreme caution,” the guidelines said.
  • Careful judgment is needed when a doctor is contacted through email or other electronic communications by someone who is seeking medical advice but has had no previous contact with the doctor. In such situations, it is usually best for the doctor to encourage the person to schedule an office visit, or, in the case of an urgent concern, to go to the nearest emergency department.
  • Doctors should establish an online professional profile so that it appears first during an online search, instead of a review of the doctor from a physician ranking site. This can provide more control, so that the information read by patients is accurate.
  • Medical trainees need to be careful about what they post online, or they could damage their future careers.

“It is important for physicians to be aware of the implications for confidentiality and how the use of online media for non-clinical purposes impacts trust in the medical profession,” Dr. Humayun Chaudhry, president and CEO of the FSMB, said in the news release.

The policy paper appears online and in the April 16 print issue of the journal Annals of Internal Medicine.

SOURCE: American College of Physicians, news release, April 11, 2013

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_135870.html

Related Online CEU Course:

Ethics and Social MediaEthics and Social Media is a 2-hour online continuing education course for psychologists, counselors, social workers, and MFTs. Is it useful or appropriate (or ethical or therapeutic) for a therapist and a client to share the kinds of information that are routinely posted on Social Networking Services (SNS) like Facebook, Twitter, and others? How are psychotherapists to handle “Friending” requests from clients? What are the threats to confidentiality and therapeutic boundaries that are posed by the use of social media sites, texts, or tweets in therapist-client communication? The purpose of this course is to offer psychotherapists the opportunity to examine their practices in regard to the use of social networking services in their professional relationships and communications. Included are ethics topics such as privacy and confidentiality, boundaries and multiple relationships, competence, the phenomenon of friending, informed consent, and record keeping. A final section offers recommendations and resources for the ethical use of social networking and the development of a practice social media policy.

CE Information:

Professional Development Resources is approved as a provider of continuing education by the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB #1046); the National Board of Certified Counselors (NBCC #5590); the American Psychological Association (APA); the National Association of Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Counselors (NAADAC #000279); the Florida Board of Clinical Social Work, Marriage & Family Therapy, and Mental Health Counseling (#BAP346); the California Board of Behavioral Sciences (#PCE1625); the Texas Board of Examiners of Marriage & Family Therapists (#114); the South Carolina Board of Professional Counselors and Marriage & Family Therapists (#193); and the Ohio Counselor, Social Worker and Marriage & Family Therapist Board (#RCST100501).

Ethics and Social Media

Posted on by

Ethics and Social Media – New 2-Hour Online CEU Course

Ethics and Social MediaIs it useful or appropriate (or ethical or therapeutic) for a therapist and a client to share the kinds of information that are routinely posted on Social Networking Services (SNS) like Facebook, Twitter, and others? How are psychotherapists to handle “Friending” requests from clients? What are the threats to confidentiality and therapeutic boundaries that are posed by the use of social media sites, texts, or tweets in therapist-client communication? The purpose of this course is to offer psychotherapists the opportunity to examine their practices in regard to the use of social networking services in their professional relationships and communications. Included are ethics topics such as privacy and confidentiality, boundaries and multiple relationships, competence, the phenomenon of friending, informed consent, and record keeping. A final section offers recommendations and resources for the ethical use of social networking and the development of a practice social media policy. Course #20-75 | 2013 | 28 pages | 14 posttest questions

Professional Development Resources is approved as a provider of continuing education by the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB #1046); the National Board of Certified Counselors (NBCC #5590); the American Psychological Association (APA); the National Association of Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Counselors (NAADAC #000279); the Florida Board of Clinical Social Work, Marriage & Family Therapy, and Mental Health Counseling (#BAP346); the California Board of Behavioral Sciences (#PCE1625); the Texas Board of Examiners of Marriage & Family Therapists (#114); the South Carolina Board of Professional Counselors and Marriage & Family Therapists (#193); and the Ohio Counselor, Social Worker and Marriage & Family Therapist Board (#RCST100501).

12 Days of Christmas – Daily Deal #8

Posted on by

Our 8th day of Christmas daily deal in our 12 Days of Christmas promotion is:

Ethics & Risk Management: Expert Tips V

CE Credit: 2 Hours
Regular Price: $32
50% Off Today Only: $16!

Ethics & Risk Management: Expert Tips VThis course addresses a variety of ethics and risk management topics in the form of 14 archived articles from The National Psychologist. Topics include: (1) Is it kosher for a psychotherapist to serve as an expert witness? (2) Weighing patient’s rights against psychologist’s rights (3) Techno breaches could cost practitioners big bucks (4) Custody cases require special training (5) Too many rules – Risk Management (6) Pay me now, pay me later (7) Business of Practice and Ethics (8) Not all nations share APA’s ethics standards (9) Student/professor dating always questionable (10) Therapists need a strong back-up plan (11) Ethics primer addresses core issues (12) Wintering south can create ethics problems (13) Confidentiality in the 21st Century – Risk Management (14) The fiduciary heart of ethics. This course is intended for psychotherapists of all specialties. Course #20-69 | 2012 | 25 pages | 15 posttest questions

Click here to order now! Sale ends @ midnight.

Don’t forget to like our Facebook page to be entered in the drawing for a FREE course! Drawings held daily December 14-25.

Professional Development Resources is approved as a provider of continuing education by the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB #1046); the National Board of Certified Counselors (NBCC#5590); the American Psychological Association (APA); the National Association of Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Counselors (NAADAC #000279); the Commission on Dietetic Registration (CDR #PR001); the Continuing Education Board of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA #AAUM); the American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA #3159); and various state licensing boards.

Careless Use of Facebook Can Jeopardize Your Career

Posted on by

By Frances Patterson, PhD, MAC

Careless Use of Facebook Can Jeopardize Your CareerI often am asked questions regarding the ethical issues for counselors regarding social networking, specifically Facebook. At that point I usually hear about a situation that has caused professional and personal problems for an addictions professional. In each scenario that follows names have been changed and situations modified to protect the identity of those involved.

Situation 1 – Using Social Media to Monitor Clients

Danny is a substance abuse counselor who decided to join Facebook for a specific reason: he wanted to look up clients to see if they were posting information on Facebook that would indicate they were using.

What are the Ethical Concerns?

Client autonomy: Clients in treatment have a right to choose whether to use alcohol or other drugs. As a counselor would you drive by a client’s house to see if that client is sitting on the front porch smoking a joint? Clients have a right to their personal lives outside of treatment, whether or not it is what we would choose for them.

Counseling relationship: Trust is a major component of the counseling relationship. A client could consider it a violation of that trust to “spy” on him on Facebook. Before the advent of Facebook, a counselor asked clients if they were using and conducted drug screens. Should our methods be any different today?

Do no harm: Is there the possibility that such actions could harm a client? We must always consider the possible outcomes of our actions when it involves client care. A client could possibly feel betrayed by her counselor if such “investigation” is pursued by the counselor.

Professional boundaries: One of our responsibilities as counselors is to have healthy professional boundaries. These boundaries can easily become blurred if or when we begin to intrude on the personal lives of clients outside the professional relationship. Just as we need to set appropriate boundaries with clients regarding our personal Facebook pages, we too should respect their boundaries.

Situation 2 – The Personal/Private Divide

Mary Beth was a counselor at a large addictions treatment facility. She is not in recovery from drug or alcohol addiction. She had recently returned from a vacation at the beach. A client of one of Mary Beth’s colleagues at the same facility mentioned during an individual session that he had been searching people on Facebook and found Mary Beth’s page. He stated, “I really liked those pictures of her vacation.” After the client left, his counselor looked up Mary Beth on Facebook to see what the client was referring to. To her dismay she found that Mary Beth had no security on her page and all of her information was open to anyone who came across it. Additionally, she had posted pictures of herself in a bikini, holding a beer in her hand, with a male companion who appeared to be fondling her. Mary Beth was fired from her job. The agency maintained that she was not projecting a professional image and was negatively affecting the reputation of the agency.

What are the Ethical Concerns?

Counseling relationship: What did the pictures portray to clients and colleagues who saw them on her Facebook page? We have a responsibility to safeguard the integrity of our relationship with clients. (NAADAC Code of Ethics, Principle I) Part of this safeguard is to always being aware of perceptions and how those perceptions may change the professional relationship with a client.

Professional responsibility: If Mary Beth had put the security blocks on her page which would allow only invited friends to see her page, she would have been acting more responsibly. The addiction professional recognizes that those who assume the role of assisting others to live a more responsible life take on the ethical accountability of living responsibly. The addiction professional recognizes that even in a life well-lived, harm might be done to others by works and actions. (NAADAC Code of Ethics, Principle IV)

Discretion: Mary Beth’s actions in regards to Facebook appear to be poor professional judgment. She certainly has a right to her personal life and to enjoy herself. On the other hand, professional judgment includes how we conduct ourselves in public, even in our leisure time which includes what we post on a Facebook page for all to view.

Do no harm: Although Mary Beth is not in recovery herself, the posting of the picture of her drinking may cause undue influence on clients to assume that if it is OK for a counselor to participate in these activities that it must be acceptable for them also. Or clients may believe that Mary Beth is not “practicing what she preaches”. Again, often we are talking about perceptions which may not always be reality.

Situation 3 – Information Sharing

Carla is in private practice working as a substance abuse professional. She recently joined Facebook and being a very social person, enjoys the interactions each evening with her Facebook friends. One of those friends is a counselor at a local substance abuse in-patient facility. For the past few evenings Carla has noticed that her friend has begun to post information about clients she has seen that day, funny things they have done or unusual crises they have experienced. Although her friend is not stating client names she has told others where she works.

What are the Ethical Concerns?

Confidentiality: We are to make every effort to protect the confidentiality of client information. (NAADAC Code of Ethics, Principle III) Carla’s friend has stated where she works and now she is talking about clients of that facility. She is not honoring confidentiality, even though she is not stating client identifying information. She may inadvertently be giving enough information that someone could deduce to whom she is referring. This is also a violation of client rights and their expectation that their information will be protected.

Due diligence: We are to be conscientious and careful in all of our actions when it concerns clients and our professional life. We, as professional counselors, should make every effort to avoid “gossiping” about clients. It is possible that, unbeknownst to this counselor, a client may be a “friend of a friend” on Facebook and actually can see what this counselor is posting and recognizes that the counselor is telling her story.

Legal concern: Carla is bound under 42 CFR Part 2 and HIPAA to make every reasonable effort to protect client information. This type of behavior could result in litigation.

Resolving Ethical Issues: Carla has a responsibility to go to her friend and discuss the ethical and legal concerns she has regarding her friend’s behavior. If her friend is unwilling to change that behavior, Carla next needs to seek supervision and consider her licensure reporting responsibility. (NAADAC Code of Ethics, principle VIII)

Situation 4 – Venting Frustrations

Martin has been having a difficult time at work lately. It is increasingly more stressful with an increased number of clients who are exhibiting more severe symptoms, fewer staff and fewer resources. He has recently been having disagreements with his supervisor. He has also begun to post his “venting” on his Facebook page.

What are the Ethical Concerns?

Discretion: As professionals we have an obligation to use utmost discretion in all of our professional life. Ethically, Martin would be well served to seek other supervision or peer support in his stressful situation rather than venting on his Facebook page.

Professional relationships: Martin is not building, supporting or treating his professional relationships respectfully. As professionals we are to respect other professionals by going to them when we have problems that are affecting us. I have heard many accounts of people losing their jobs as a result of airing their complaints about their jobs and employers on Facebook.

Situation 5 – Compromised Testimonials?

A 12 step focused residential treatment facility developed a Facebook page as a means of advertising. It is also a means for keeping a connection with former clients. These former clients may also write comments on their experience with the treatment program. Recently the administrator contacted former clients requesting that they post testimonials on Facebook. A counselor conducting patient aftercare was made aware of the request and was concerned about confidentiality.

What are the Ethical Concerns?

Informed consent and Confidentiality: In this situation clients need to be fully informed about the risks of posting testimonials on Facebook. If they do post voluntarily, they should be informed of the risk of confidentiality being compromised.

Due Diligence: This treatment facility, as well as the counselor who was made aware of the request, have an obligation to be diligent in the care of clients and sensitive client information.

Exploitation: Is the facility using client testimonials to help others who are suffering with addictions or are they using this to further their business and bring in revenue? The concern here is whether or not it is exploiting clients to ask them to help in marketing a program by posting personal testimonials about their treatment experience. Clients may not understand the far-reaching outcomes of this course of action. Treatment programs need to consider all aspects of their decisions to use media such as Facebook to market their programs.

Reporting

Often I hear professionals say that they hesitate to report unethical behavioral because they are friends with the person or they don’t want to hurt the other person’s career. As licensed or certified professionals, we have an ethical and legal obligation to report unethical behavior that cannot be resolved or that is such an egregious violation that it is beyond being resolved.

As technology grows and becomes more and more available, we as professionals must always consider the ramifications of our actions when using any technology, including social network sites such as Facebook. When ethics are violated, we have an obligation to address the issue and report to licensure boards when necessary.

Be true to yourself, your profession and your colleagues.

Source: http://www.naadac.org/component/content/article/48-publications/643-careless-use-of-facebook-can-jeopardize-your-career

Enhanced by Zemanta