The case study involving Ms. Dancer, a Licensed Clinical Social Worker (LCSW), and Mr. Markdown, her supervisor during her two year probated suspension, provides ample examples of unethical behaviors and actions. From improper self-disclosure to potential fraud, both Mr. Markdown and Ms. Dancer must change the way they approach professional boundaries going forward.
Ms. Dancer
As derived from her initial supervision session, it is clear Ms. Dancer participated in several unethical behaviors. Ms. Dancer, as reported, violated confidentiality by having her daughter “hang” around the office, bringing her to the home of a former client, and disclosing confidential information to her daughter, such as the details of the former client’s death.
…show more content…
Dancer is in violation of code numbers 7, 8, and 11. To begin, code number 7 states, “a social worker shall safeguard the client's rights to confidentiality within the limits of the law” (TDSHS, 2015). Through involving her daughter, Ms. Dancer violated this code. According to Reamer (2016), exceptions to confidentiality include reporting of abuse or neglect, reporting threat of harm to self or others, and providing client information on a need to know basis within agency settings. Ms. Dancer’s daughter is not a professional, nor a reporting body, therefore there is no ethical explanation as why Ms. Dancer would share information about her clients to her daughter, nor why should would allow her daughter to be in the office while clients are present. Next, code number 8 states, “a social worker shall be responsible for setting and maintaining professional boundaries”. This code was clearly violated when Ms. Dancer went to the home of her former client. Ms. Dancer was not conducting a professional home visit, and as previously mentioned this visit greatly blurs boundaries. Lastly, code number 11 states, “a social worker shall not exploit his or her position of trust with a client or former client” (TDSHS, 2015). Through making the arrangement with her former client to accept artwork in lieu of payment, it is possible Ms. Dancer was exploiting her position of trust. Further, the art she attained was worth well over the amount owed to her by the client. It is possible her client felt pressured to agree to the exchange due to the power dynamic of the relationship, thus suggesting Ms. Dancer exploited the trust and power she held over her former