The scenario is about Miriam R., a nurse practitioner operating in the maternity unit of a hospital in the local area. She was undergoing counseling with a social worker named Judy C. regarding her recent separation with her husband. Ms. R. would at times speak about work pressures during therapy. On various instances, she revealed how difficult it was for her to see adolescent girls give birth but how she felt satisfied after helping a teenager decide on whether to give out her baby for adoption. On the other hand, Ms. C. and her spouse have struggled with infertility for long (Reamer, 2012). They wanted to adopt but their private prospective plans failed after pregnant women whom they had formed a relationship with changed their minds on giving up their babies. Ms. C. was seriously considering asking Ms. R. whether she can assist her and her husband to privately adopt a kid at Ms. R’s hospital.
Problematic decisions made by the practitioner
In this case, both Ms. C. and Ms. R. who are practitioners made inappropriate decisions. The major problematic decision made by Ms. R who is a maternity nurse was sharing the stress she experiences at work with Ms. C. during therapy. By doing this, she crossed the professional boundary which is unethical. Professional boundaries concerns are one of the most challenging ethical problems (Reamer, 2012). In this scenario, Ms. R. violated the work boundary by trusting Ms. C. to the extent that she told her about what bothers her at work rather than just concentrating on therapy.
On the other hand, Ms. C. acted unethically and crossed the professional boundary when she thought of asking Ms. R. to help her pursue an adoption. As a counselor, there is a limit as to what one should discuss with the client. The primary goal of therapy is to help the patient to solve the problem they are facing effectively. However, Ms. R‘s revelation to Ms. C. no how she helps young girls decide on whether to pursue adoption presented an ethical challenge to Ms. C. Conflicts of interest which emanate from dual or multiple associations might lead to boundary issues that practitioners face (Reamer, 2012). Dual relations occur whenever a professional start playing a second role to a client such as being a friend or a sexual partner, among others. With regard to this case, Ms. C. was interested in how Ms. R. would help her to adopt which is wrong and a cross of the professional boundary.
More ethical choices of action for the practitioner
Ms. R. would have acted more ethically by not telling her counselor about her work issues. The fact that she revealed this information to Ms. C means she confided in her. It is crucial to know the potential ethical challenges that may present in practice. Failure to this, human service professional may get into situations which might be hard to get out of (Reamer, 2012). As such, Ms. R. ought to have been aware that being strongly affiliated with her therapist might jeopardize her work as a nurse.
As for Ms. C., she should have considered using the right channel to meet her needs. As such, she should not have had thoughts on asking Ms. C to help her with the adoption plan since it would have been exploitative. Perhaps she should have visited Ms. R’s workplace and enquire about the correct procedures to adopt a child.
Plan of action
The objective to accomplish in this action plan is to make sure that both Ms. C. also, Ms. R acted all the more morally. The principle step is to train the professionals on morals at work. This would provide the experts with the vital knowledge on the conceivable ethical issues they are probably going to experience and how to deal with them. For example, Ms. C. would realize when and how to have limits when managing customers.
Similar disciplinary scenarios in my state
A comparable case in California included James D. Lisle who filled in as an advocate in a Christian program. Lisle got into a sexual association with one of his customers whom she additionally impregnated in 1993. Lisle exploited the patient, matured 27 years as she was defenseless and experienced extreme gloom (Marquis, 1994). The law of the province of California confines specialists from getting physically involved with their customers for a long time in the wake of finishing treatment. Lisle was charged for not sticking to the law, condemned for one year, and his permit disavowed.
Marquis, J. (1994). Therapist’s license revoked: Misconduct: James D. Lisle developed a sexual relationship with a former patient he met when he was a contract counselor at a Christian therapy program. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-12-03-me-4499-story.html
Reamer, F. G. (2012). Boundary issues and dual relationships in the human services. Columbia University Press.