Well said Pauline.
The MHP should always have an informed consent agreement with thier clients
which outlines services and risks within any intervention format. In addition
the Collaborative Agreement should outline services and limitations. The
Collaborative model is clear on the extent of involvement that the MHP is
committing to.
The standards of the mental health worker"s usually give clear guidelines of
obligation to refer and/or inform especially is there is a risk to anyone. The
collaborative professional going from the Coaching role to a Therapeutc role
creates differing and conflicted obligations just as being a litigating
attorney and being a collaborative attorney on the same case would.
Robert Colby, R. Psych
Vancouver BC
----- Original Message -----
From: Pauline Tesler
To: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 2:25 PM
Subject: Re: [CollabLaw] MHP ethics
It's a matter of clear role definition, careful informed consent, and well
crafted documentation, I would think. A MHP acting as a mediator not only
isn't obliged to, but would be violating role boundaries, to provide
treatment in a mediation. If that is so, then other roles and functions
that require or benefit from being served by a MHP also would have
boundaries and definitions inconsistent with being the provider of therapy
for an urgent or critical need. Whether there is an ethical obligation to
suggest a referral for treatment when a licensed MHP is acting in a role
other than treating therapist is another matter--surely there are ethics
opinions that address this? In any event I would think the obligation could
be satisfied by making a prompt appropriate referral. By way of analogy, a
couples therapist, for instance, might consider it inconsistent with the
retention as couples counselor and the boundaries relating thereto to
provide individual psychotherapy to one spouse, but might be ethically
obliged to recommend it under some circumstances.
pht
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 1:19 PM, Lynda J. Robbins <ljrobbinsesq@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> A question has come up at our trainings with regard to the ethical
> obligation of MHP. If their ethical obligation is to treat emotional issues
> and they are acting as facilitator or neutral coach and there are people in
> the room with emotional issues not being addressed, is the MHP in violation
> of their ethics? In other words, how can a MHP NOT treat and not be in
> violation of ethics?
>
> As an attorney, I can limit my representation of a client. I thought that
> MHP could also do so--is this correct?
>
> Thanks for your assistance.
>
> Lynda Robbins
> __________________________________________________________
> Lynda J. Robbins
> 11 Summer Street
> Chelmsford, MA 01824
> 978-256-8178
> ljrobbinsesq@xxxxxxxxxxx <ljrobbinsesq%40verizon.net>
> www.robbinsresolves.com
>
> The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments
> to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and
> may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the
> intended recipient, please notify Lynda J. Robbins immediately at
> (978)256-8178 or ljrobbinsesq@xxxxxxxxxxx <ljrobbinsesq%40verizon.net> and
> destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. Thank you.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
--
Pauline H. Tesler
Tesler, Sandmann & Fishman
163 Miller Avenue, Suite 4
Mill Valley, California 94941
Telephone: (415)383-5600
Facsimile: (415)383-5675
Web:
www.teslercollaboration.com
www.collaborativedivorcebook.com
www.divorcenet.com/ca/tesler.html www.collaborativepracticesfbay.com
Blogs:
http://www.collaborativedivorcenews.com/
http://familylaw.typepad.com
This message may include privileged lawyer-client communications. If you are
not the intended recipient, please delete and destroy all copies, and notify
this office.
Please do not send confidential information via email unless you are already
an established client. No legal advice can be given via email except to
established clients.
Thank you.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.23.0/1379 - Release Date: 4/15/2008
6:10 PM
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
