Multiple Relationships with Clients: Applying the Concept of

Potentially Beneficial Interactions to the Practice of Addiction Counseling

Kevin Doyle, Ed.D., LPC, LSATPLongwood University

VSIAS 2015

Multiple Relationships

• Also known as dual relationships

• Definition: “...when helping professionals take on two or more roles simultaneously or sequentially with a help seeker.” (Herlihy and Corey, 2006)

American Counseling Association (ACA) Code of Ethics (2014)

• 2014 Code: Sections A.6. and A.7.

• 2005 Code: Section A.5.D.

ACA Code of Ethics 2014

A.6: Managing and Maintaining Boundaries and Professional Relationships

a. Previous Relationshipsb. Extending Counseling Boundariesc. Documenting Boundary Extensionsd. Role Changes in the Professional Relationshipe. Nonprofessional Interactions or Relationships

(Other than Sexual or Romantic Relationships)

ACA Code of Ethics 2014

• A.7. Roles and Relationships at Individual, Group, Institutional, and Societal Levels

• A. Advocacy

• B. Confidentiality and Advocacy

NAADAC Code (2011)

• Does not speak specifically to the concept of “potentially beneficial interactions”

• Section 1: The Counseling Relationship, Standard 3, Dual Relationships:

• 7. The addiction professional recognizes that there are situations in which dual relationships are difficult to avoid. Rural areas, small communities and other situations necessitate discussion of the counseling relationship and taking steps to distinguish the counseling relationship from other interactions.

ACA Code of Ethics 2005

• Used the phrase “Potentially beneficial interactions”• Section A.5.D.• Same as much of what is in 2014 Code Section

but not the wording around membership in a professional association, organization or community

Literature Review• Counselors in Recovery (Doyle, 1997)

• Social Workers in Recovery (Kaplan, L., 2005)

• Counselors’ Beliefs (Hollander et al., 2006)

• ACA Code Issues (Kaplan, D., 2006)

• Relevant Issues (Hecksher, 2007)

• Proposed Guidelines (Doyle, 2015)

Multiple Relationships and Substance Abuse Counselors

• Counselors in Recovery

• Staff/Collegial Relationships

• Social Issues

• Issues for Supervisors

• Other

Counselors in Recovery

• Issues such as:

Speaking/sharing at meetingsSponsoring current/former clientsAcknowledging current/former clients

• Pros and Cons

Staff/Collegial Relationships

• Former clients may come to work in the field, perhaps even where they received tx

• Former clients may become treating professionals’ colleagues, supervisees, or even supervisors

Social Issues

• Encountering current or former clients in social situations• Particularly common in more rural areas• Concept of avoidability• What about the use of alcohol (or other

substances) in these settings

Issues for Supervisors

• SAMHSA TAP 21 challenges supervisors to be aware of important things in in their

supervisees’ lives

• What is more important than recovery status?

• How can supervisors broach this, support this, understand this? And help their supervisees?

Proposed Guidelines (PG)

• Counselors in Recovery

• Staff/Collegial Relationships

• Social Issues

• Issues for Supervisors

PG: Counselors in Recovery

• Consider sharing in more general terms at mtgs. with current/former clients • Do not sponsor current clients• Avoid sponsoring former clients if possible,

but regardless allow generous amount of time• Follow employer policy, of course (or work to change it!)

• Acknowledge current and former clients judiciously/vaguely if needed

PG: Staff/Collegial Relationships

• Former clients have every right to be employed• If they return, have a private conversation

with them if needed• Consider an “informed consent” discussion• Review supervisory options if needed• Prioritize objectivity in supervision

PG: Social Issues

• Again, issues of avoidability

• Use of alcohol (or other substances)

• Avoid when possible

• Use high amount of discretion out of respect for current/former clients’ recovery

PG: Issues for Supervisors

• Educate yourselves• Be responsive to supervisees• Consult with colleagues• Stay current on the literature• Offer appropriate guidance to supervisees• Be familiar with local culture of recovery

Discussion

• What issues are you seeing?

• What issues have supervisees brought to you?

• Are there hypothetical scenarios that you could envision developing?

• Does the legalization of marijuana affect this issue at all?

References

• American Counseling Association (ACA). (2005). ACA Code of Ethics. Alexandria, VA: Author. • American Counseling Association (ACA). (2014). ACA Code of Ethics . Alexandria, VA: Author. • Doyle, K. (1997). Substance abuse counselors in recovery: Implications for the ethical issue of

dual relationships. Journal of Counseling and Development. (75)6, 428-432.• Doyle, K. (2015). Multiple Relationships with Clients: Applying the Concept of Potentially

Beneficial Interactions to the Practice of Addiction Counseling. Annual Review of Addictions and Offender Counseling.

• Hecksher, D. (2007). Former substance users working as counselors: A dual relationship. Substance Use & Misuse. 42(8), 1253-1268.

• Hollander, J., Bauer, S., Herlihy, B., & McCollum, V. (2006). Beliefs of board certified substance abuse counselors regarding multiple relationships. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 28(1), 84-94.

• Kaplan, D. (2006). Allowing dual relationships. Counseling Today. Retrieved from ct.counseling.org/2006/03/ct-online-ethics-update-9/

• Kaplan, L.E. (2005). Dual Relationships: The challenge for social workers in recovery. Journal of Social Work Practice in the Addictions, 5(3), 73-90.

• NAADAC: The Association for Addiction Professionals (NAADAC). (2011). Code of Ethics Retrieved from www.naadac.org.

About Your PresenterKevin Doyle, Ed.D., LPC, LSATP

Assistant Professor, Longwood UniversityCommonwealth of Va., Board of Counseling

Past-President of VAADAC (1999-2001)Licensed Professional Counselor

Licensed Substance Abuse Treatment Practitionerwww.drkevindoyle.com

kevin@drkevindoyle.com@kevindoylelpc