The Oates Journal (ISSN: 1098-1446) is a publication of the Wayne E. Oates Institute addressing issues related to spirituality, ethics, and healing from the perspective of pastoral care and counseling.

Introduction

He knew that I taught Pastoral Counseling, perhaps that was what precipitated the conversation. A precocious young man of 17 years, thoughtful and generally very responsible. We were talking about his plans to go off to college. His parents and I were colleagues; they in parish ministry, I at a university. I am ordained but not in parish ministry. I have not sought licensure as a counselor in my state. As we discussed the apparently benign minutia of finances he remarked that he had made $500 “donating” sperm (directly) to a 22 year-old lesbian. She and her partner wanted children. He was not wholly comfortable with his decision and, a little shocked at his unguarded moment, he asked, “You won’t tell my parents, will you?”

Professional Boundaries

Where did this conversation take place? It was in a social setting but about an intimate decision. The person involved knew I taught counseling but was not, at that moment, counseling. It was of a penitential nature to a member of the clergy but not in a church context. It was to an avuncular figure, but not to a family member. The problem has legal as well as social ramifications. Should a non-lawyer comment? Is my duty to him that of a counselor or an older friend? Is my duty to his parents a duty to warn, that of a colleague, or that of a friend?

Boundary issues blindside professional caregivers all the time. It has even been suggested that dual ethical duties such as truth v loyalty, the good of the individual v the good of the community, short-term v long-term solutions, and justice v mercy (Kidder, 1995) are present in all true ethical dilemmas. As stories unfold things change. Even though you know some things you never know every relevant thing. Best decisions given the circumstances may or not turn out to be the best decisions in the long run and taking one’s time making decisions can be a virtue (Badaracco, 2002).

More ambiguously, during the latter half of the 20th century titles and professional identities fell out of favor. People are no longer defined by their vocations; the boundaries between the roles of friend and “Reverend,” colleague and counselor are no longer sharply defined. Pristine, limited, purely professional relationships are rare and the dual demands of professionalism and being a genuine human presence are prime territory for boundary confusion.

Boundary violations are the most common complaints against counselors and fertile areas for confusion, hurt feelings, abuse, even potential lawsuits. Miriam Parent noted that “For years much was overlooked or forgiven on the basis of good intent. Innocence was presumed” (Parent, 2006, p. 2-3). Today neither innocence nor goodwill on the part of professionals is routinely presumed; in fact professionals are held to a higher standard of ethical scrupulosity. “From everyone who has been given much,” Jesus said, “much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked” (Luke 12:48[b]).

Appropriate boundaries, habitual but kindly professionalism, help structure interpersonal interaction. In clearly professional settings when a parishioner, patient, or client comes to discuss a professional matter clarity should be a matter of course. Parent (2006) observes,

While multiple roles are a fact of life in many settings, the counselor must be aware that it is his or her responsibility, not the counselee’s, to clearly define and set the boundaries of each relationship and to be willing to redefine them as roles change. When roles or responsibilities conflict, supervision and/or consultation is expected and indispensable if counseling is to be productive. Open discussion with counselees concerning expectations, possible role conflicts and counseling boundaries must become a norm in our ministry settings. Written informed consent procedures can be of great assistance in preventing role conflicts or uncertainties. Good informed consent policies should cover the practicalities of counseling services, such as time and place limitations, as well as the larger issues of confidentiality and referral. (p. 10)

Little rituals, such as habitually modeling unselfconscious honesty and clarity can set an emotional tone that encourage open, but clear communication. Conducting private counseling in semiprivate settings (a room with a window or a panel in the door, for example) and refraining from counseling in public settings preempts many potential problems.

Boundaries, like manners, exist for the safety and comfort of all parties. A loving or caring relationship is not necessarily incompatible with objectivity “…love can allow for impartial reflection on the person’s ego ideal, their wishes, hopes, and desires, and the best strategy for seeking a fulfilling life” (Clough, 2006, p. 23).

Crossing Boundaries

Crossing boundaries or blending roles is inevitable and not necessarily bad, but it must be done with full awareness, openness, honesty, and a reasonable expectation that slipping the letter of the law is toward the higher standard of the spirit of the law. “Ethics is not in the boundaries; it is more comprehensively in the way you treat a suffering or struggling human being – your ability and willingness to act in a caring, empathetic, competent and nonexploitive manner” (Fay (2002) cited in Corey, Corey, & Callanan, 2007, p. 268). The American Counseling Association (ACA) Code of Ethics notes:

Examples of potentially beneficial interactions [with clients and former clients] include, but are not limited to, attending a formal ceremony (e.g., a wedding/commitment ceremony or graduation); purchasing a service or product provided by a client or former client (excepting unrestricted bartering); hospital visits to an ill family member; mutual membership in a professional association, organization, or community. (Section A.5.d. Potentially Beneficial Interactions, American Counseling Association [ACA] Code of Ethics)

Similar guidelines are suggested for relationships between Supervisors and Students (F.3.e. ACA Code of Ethics) and Educators and Students (F.10.f. ACA Code of Ethics).

We use our knowledge and professional associations for the benefit of the people we serve and not to secure unfair personal advantage (American Association of Pastoral Counselors [AAPC] Code of Ethics, II A)

We clearly represent our level of membership and limit our practice to that level (AAPC Code of Ethics, II B)

Counseling rendered by the church or its staff or volunteers should be within the standard of practice & level of care of secular counselors in the area.

Confidentiality

Clergy have a unique responsibility to clearly spell out limits of confidentiality based on function. When functioning in the role of clergy they are bound, or the parishioner may assume that they are bound, by a traditionally high standard for privacy. Many states have laws similar to the Florida statutes, Title VII, paragraph 90.505 Privilege with respect to communications to clergy which state:

(a) A "member of the clergy" is a priest, rabbi, practitioner of Christian Science, or minister of any religious organization or denomination usually referred to as a church, or an individual reasonably believed so to be by the person consulting him or her [italics added].

(b) A communication between a member of the clergy and a person is "confidential" if made privately for the purpose of seeking spiritual counsel and advice from the member of the clergy in the usual course of his or her practice or discipline and not intended for further disclosure except to other persons present in furtherance of the communication.

(2) A person has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent another from disclosing, a confidential communication by the person to a member of the clergy in his or her capacity as spiritual adviser.

(3) The privilege may be claimed by:

(a) The person.

(b) The guardian or conservator of a person.

(c) The personal representative of a deceased person.

(d) The member of the clergy, on behalf of the person. The member of the clergy's authority to do so is presumed in the absence of evidence to the contrary.

Churches used to have similarly strong statements of confidentiality on behalf of clergy although, in recent years, many Protestant and Jewish communions have come to allow for breaches of confidentiality if they reasonably believe persons to be in danger and some go so far as to make clergy mandated reporters of “knowledge of harm, or the risk of harm [italics added], related to the physical abuse, neglect, and/or sexual molestation or abuse of a minor or an adult who lacks mental capacity when (1) such information is gained outside of a confidential

Communication…or (2) she or he reasonably believes that there is risk of future physical harm or abuse [italics added]” (Book of Order, Presbyterian Church (USA), G-6.0204 a and b). Recent knowledge about the chronic and compulsive nature of harmful behaviors, child abuse included, has trumped the previous, perhaps naïve, hope in the immediate efficacy of confession, repentance, and restitution.

The American Association of Pastoral Counselors, embracing the standards of the counseling profession, states:

We do not disclose client confidences to anyone, except: as mandated by law; to prevent a clear and immediate danger to someone; in the course of a civil, criminal or disciplinary action arising from the counseling where the pastoral counselor is a defendant; for purposes of supervision or consultation; or by previously obtained written permission. In cases involving more than one person (as client) written permission must be obtained from all legally accountable persons who have been present during the counseling before any disclosure can be made. (AAPC Code of Ethics, IV D)

In fact,

Every State, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories have statutes that identify persons who are required to report child maltreatment under specific circumstances. Approximately 26 States currently include members of the clergy among those professionals specifically mandated by law to report known or suspected instances of child abuse or neglect. In approximately 18 States and Puerto Rico, any person who suspects child abuse or neglect is required to report. This inclusive language appears to include clergy but may be interpreted otherwise. (Child Welfare Information Gateway)

Children have not, generally, been held to have the penitent privilege although it is interesting to note that the Mature Minor Rule, which has regularly been used to allow minor women to choose medical treatments (e.g. abortions) on their own authority and is enshrined in law (e.g. the Revised Code of the State of Washington [RCW] recognizes the right of a person 13 or older to give consent for him/herself to receive outpatient mental health treatment) has not yet been cited on behalf of other services such as the clergy-penitent privilege.

The American Association of Christian Counselors’ Code of Ethics handles confidentiality boundary issues by stating that “Christian counselors maintain client confidentiality to the fullest extent allowed by law, professional ethics, and church or organizational rules" (American Association of Christian Counselors Code of Ethics, section 1-410 Maintaining Client Confidentiality).

Documentation

Miriam Parent (2006) notes:

In previous years personal memory was a sufficient standard–if a respected authority (e.g., doctor, clergy, counselor) said it was so, it was. That is no longer true. In an age of individual equality and skepticism of public leadership, anyone’s word needs to be backed up with documentation. Formal counseling relationships require keeping concise but thorough records. Written consent to policies or notes indicating that a verbal agreement was reached becomes essential documentation when crises emerge. Time and activity logs, along with concise notes on session content, need to be maintained in a confidential format. In ministries where offices are often highly accessible, counseling files need special protection. The counselor is ultimately responsible for the actions of anyone who might access those files. (p. 15-16)

Finally

Lawrence Hinman (2003) defines a virtue as “a strength of character, usually acquired through habit, that promotes human flourishing” (p. 383). For our purposes the emphasis should be on promoting human flourishing and acquiring by habit. An ounce of prevention, Ben Franklin wrote, is worth a pound of cure. Simple rules for living within boundaries will preempt many, but not all, boundary problems.

Peterson and Seligman (2004) wrote that virtues are;

drawn from different levels of abstractness, and potentially in conflict. A hierarchy of values is therefore introduced by most philosophers to help determine when one or another virtue should be manifested. Indeed, a great deal of discussion has tried to enumerate master virtues (e.g. wisdom, courage, kindness) that take precedence over the others . . . enumerated virtues and their hierarchal organization depend on the way of life – the cultural ethos – in which they are embedded. (p. 87)

The United States, almost uniquely among cultures, values diversity and multiculturalism. In so doing it has become a “low context” culture, one in which rules and roles are not assumed but must be negotiated and clarified with each interaction. But rules and traditions are not chosen at random; good rules grow out of human experience – solutions discovered to preempt problems. In the same way that simple procedures like a teller counting money twice at a bank prevent a myriad of problems, simple habits of honesty, clarity, and record-keeping can head off many difficulties.

The first preemptive principle for communication is: honesty with self and others, clear, complete, and proactive communication. The first of President Woodrow Wilson’s (1918) 14 points was “Open covenants of peace, openly arrived at, after which there shall be no private international understandings of any kind but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view.” To be sure, some privacy and confidentiality is necessary for interpersonal, counseling, and international communication. Wilson’s point was not to attack privacy, but to support honesty.

Privacy is the appropriate recognition that people need some space to themselves; some space between behavior and speech relevant only to a select person or persons and behavior and speech which must be passed judgment upon by the society at large. People need to be able to openly reflect on their thoughts, feelings, and behavior in that interim space between personal reflection and public admission. Self-honesty must precede public honesty. In the 12 Steps a “searching and fearless” personal inventory precedes admitting one’s wrongs to God and another human being; and admission of one’s wrongs to another human being precedes careful decision-making about amends. Respect for, focus on others, must precede amends. Amends are not undertaken if they would injure other people.

But behind this process is honesty; first with oneself by means of self reflection and consultation with one other person, second with other persons insofar as such honesty is healthy and helpful for them. “[The book of First] John might suggest that the appropriate therapeutic question would be, ‘What is the most loving thing to do?’” (Clough, 2006, p. 28)

My response to the young man in question was to keep the conversation private but to allow it to continue in a more formal setting. To help him activate his capacity for self-reflection in the light of the biblical narrative and values he embraced. Fortunately the liaison had not resulted in pregnancy, he returned the money and decided that the undertaking was ill advised. Having learned from his error he breathed a sigh of relief and went away with a resolve to think things through more carefully in the future. Had a pregnancy resulted or had he decided to continue this means of earning extra income the ethical issues, hence boundaries, hence decisions about the responsibilities involved would have changed.

References

American Association of Christian Counselors Code of Ethics. Retrieved from http://www.aacc.net/about-us/code-of-ethics/ August 7, 2008

American Association of Pastoral Counselors Code of Ethics. Retrieved from http://www.aapc.org/ethics.cfm. August 7, 2008

American Counseling Association Code of Ethics. Retrieved from http://www.counseling.org/Resources/CodeofEthics/TP/HOME/CT2.aspx http://www.counseling.org/Resources/CodeofEthics/TP/HOME/CT2.aspx August 7, 2008

Badaracco, J. L. (2002). Leading quietly: An unorthodox guide to doing the right thing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press

Child Welfare Information Gateway (2008). Clergy as Mandatory Reporters of Child Abuse and Neglect. Retrieved from http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/ laws_policies/statutes/clergymandated.cfm August 6, 2008

Clough, W. R. (2006). To be loved and to love. Journal of Psychology and Theology, Vol. 34, No. 1

Corey, G.; Corey, M. S.; & Callanan, P. (2007) Issues and ethics in the helping professions (Instructor’s Edition) Belmont, CA: Thompson Brooks/Cole

Hinman, L. M. (2003). Ethics: A pluralistic approach to moral theory 3rd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning

Kidder, R. (1995). How good people make tough choices. New York: Wm. Morrow & Co

Parent, M. S. (2006). Boundaries and roles in ministry counseling. American Journal of Pastoral Counseling, Vol. 8 Issue 2

Peterson, Christopher & Martin E. P. Seligman. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. New York: APA Press

Wilson, W. (1918). Fourteen points. Delivered in Joint Session to Congress, January 8, 1918. Retrieved from http://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/President_Wilson%27s_Fourteen_Points August 6, 2008

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Write comment

This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.

< Prev		Next >