Think about the location where you currently work, or a place in the past where you have worked. How safe do you, or did you, feel working there? How would you assess the workplace’s safety plan? What might the organization do to improve on the plan? What suggestions would you make? (200 words)
Think about the difference between the duty to warn and the duty to protect. Should states have laws that mandate when these duties come into effect? If so, what language should be used in these statutes to ensure that the client’s confidentiality is protected as well as the life of the possible victim? If you don’t think laws should be enacted to spell out the crisis worker’s duty, what other steps can be taken to ensure safety all around? (200 words)
Think about a time when you ended a important relationship. Think about how you felt; the things you needed to talk about before saying goodbye; and what you did that made the process easier or harder.
Write down your ideas about how you can use what you know about ending relationships in your work as a practitioner. (200 words)
Full Answer Section
think the company's safety plan is very effective. There have been no major incidents of violence or harassment in the time that I've been here. However, I think there are a few things that the company could do to improve the plan. For example, I think the company could do more to train employees on how to identify and report potential threats. I also think the company could do more to promote a culture of open communication, so that employees feel comfortable reporting concerns to their managers.
The duty to warn and the duty to protect are two legal obligations that mental health professionals have when their clients threaten to harm themselves or others. The duty to warn means that the mental health professional must inform the potential victim of the threat. The duty to protect means that the mental health professional must take reasonable steps to protect the potential victim from harm.
I believe that states should have laws that mandate when these duties come into effect. These laws should be carefully crafted to balance the client's right to confidentiality with the need to protect the potential victim from harm. The language in these statutes should be clear and concise, so that mental health professionals know when they have a duty to warn or protect.
Here are some specific suggestions for the language that could be used in these statutes:
- The statutes should define the terms "threat" and "reasonable steps."
- The statutes should specify who is considered a "potential victim."
- The statutes should specify what constitutes "reasonable care" in taking steps to protect the potential victim.
- The statutes should provide for exceptions to the duty to warn or protect, such as when the client is a minor or when the mental health professional believes that warning the potential victim would put the client in more danger.
I believe that these statutes would help to protect the public from harm while also protecting the confidentiality of mental health clients.
In addition to the specific suggestions above, I would also like to add that these statutes should be reviewed and updated periodically to reflect changes in the law and in society. For example, the statutes should be updated to reflect the increasing use of social media and other electronic communication.