In all moral codes, the boundaries of confidentiality are prescribed, about which the consultant must warn the client. The limits of privacy are usually discussed at the first meeting with the client and during further interaction when newly manifested circumstances require it. Surveys of clients show that, unfortunately, most of them are unaware of confidentiality boundaries and believe that absolutely any information reported to a psychologist is not subject to disclosure (Graham, 2018). Psychologists also keep silent about these boundaries, fearing to scare the client, reduce the level of trust in the relationship, and provoke alertness and suspicion of the person who asked for help. Confidentiality is an essential ethical principle, but it is not absolute because it can or even should be violated in some cases.
I support the idea of breaking confidentiality when the client poses a threat to society, especially in cases of child, elderly, or disabled people abuse or when there is a risk of fatal outcomes. From my professional experience, I encountered situations when people would tell me about their relatives bullying their kids, but I could not report the case since they were not my clients. This is conditioned by the fact that the counselor only deals with the client and none of their social circle. Violating the principle of confidentiality is essential if it is required by state or federal law. Usually, it occurs in courts or prisons when specialists need to solve a case (Graham, 2018). Ultimately, when an individual presents a menace to society, for instance, they report they want to murder anyone, a counselor should break the rules and address this issue by informing authorities about it.
Reference
Graham, L. M. (2018). Justified disclosure: A phenomenological study exploring licensed professional counseling professionals’ experiences with breaking confidentiality [Doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University]. North Carolina State University.