In the film Clinical (2017) on Netflix, I was introduced to Dr. Jane Mathis MD who works in adult and adolescent psychiatry. The counseling setting was very professional throughout initially she was in the company office but transitioned to providing session out of her own home. Within her time in a company setting she was working with her fellow colleagues Terrence Drummond M.D adult and adolescent psychiatry, Kellie Jo Tinney M.A MFT Marriage and Family Counseling, and Tobias Fulp M.D Geriatric psychiatrist. Dr. Mathis is shown working with Nora a female who was molested by her father and she told her that her father was dead. She worked with Nora on confronting her trauma so she can overcome it. Nora was suicidal and tried to commit suicide …show more content…
in Dr. Mathis’s office whom she attacks in the process of trying to stop her from cutting herself. After Nora cut herself fatally Dr.Mathis did call the police, but afterward due to the trauma sought counseling because her mental wellness was declining. A few months after the events Dr. Mathis is now conducting counseling sessions at her home with no post-trauma clients which were her target population before the traumatic experience. The environment in which she now conducts her sessions is warm and filled with lots of natural light as well as couches and a multitude of chairs in order to allow her client to get comfortable. Dr.Mathis uses her cell phone as her work phone and answers all phone calls professionally and respectfully even when it was from a restricted number. Although Dr.Mathis is able to prescribe medication she now uses it as a last resort and is guided by her counselor to not take on any post-trauma clients because it could bring back the trauma she experienced and do more harm to the client than good. When working with her new clients she does disclose that she does not prescribe medication easily and that it will be the last resort after de-escalation methods, interventions, and other resources are not working. Although she does decide to take on a post-trauma client named Alex which causes her to start having night terrors in regards to the Nora situation. Dr.Mathis had several unprofessional issues such as taking on a client she was not mentally ready for after her trauma, as well as seeking counseling with Terrence Drummond who is her old colleague and friend. The film does show counseling in a modern setting and provides an array of counseling setting such as part of a company and individually out of one's home. Part 2 There are several ethical issues present within the film in regards to Dr.Mathis such as dual relationships, confidentiality issues, and the violation of the principles of nonmaleficence, beneficence, and fidelity. Dr.Mathis has a dual relationship with Dr. Terrence Drummond who was her friend and coworker, but after Nora tried to commit suicide he becomes her psychiatrist due to the post-traumatic stress (PTSD). Within the session we see Dr. Drummond continue to say he knows the real Dr. Mathis and talks about her personally and even alludes to them spending time together eating dinner with his family. As a result, it seems Dr. Drummond wasn't fully assessing her from a neutral perspective but rather from a friend or fatherly perspective and assumed he knew what was best for her based off of all the time they spent together before she became her client. In regards to confidentiality, Dr.Mathis explains to her clients such as Alex and Nora that they can go at their own pace and they have the full ability to stop or continue sessions. With Nora, she promises her full confidently in regards to her sexual abuse. When Clara Dr. Mathis’s best friend and Milles her partner asks her what caused her PTSD she does not disclose any information on Nora but rather redirects the question. Eventually, Dr. Mathis breaks confidentiality by telling Alex about Nora and how she caused her to experience PTSD when trying to get Alex to open up about losing his daughter in a car crash and his face becoming disfigured as a result. She did not know at that time that Alex was, in fact, Nora’s father who had a grudge against the Dr for telling Nora to confront him. At this point in the film, we understand that Nora’s father has a grudge against Dr.
Mathis and she does not abide by the ethical principle of fidelity because Nora survived her initial suicide attempt and as a result, her father regains custody of Nora. During that time he tells Nora that Dr. Mathis is not trustworthy and told him about their sessions and everything that was said in confidence between Dr. Mathis and Nora. Dr.Mathis did not abide by the ethical principles of nonmaleficence which according to Welfel (2015) we must first and foremost do no harm, and beneficence which is her responsibility to do good by her client. But by first prescribing Nora medication and not trying other options, and telling her father all of the confidential information she endangered life not once but twice, due to the medication releasing her inhibitions causing her to confront her father which lead her to attempt suicide to later committing suicide once she realizes Dr.Mathis broke their trust by telling her father everything they discussed in their sessions and went against the ethical …show more content…
principles. Film Review: The Girl on the Train Part 1 In the film The Girl on the Train (2016) Dr. Kamal Abdic conducts counseling session within his own home which consists of a therapy room with two couches for the clients to sit on as is standard in terms of appearance with brown walls and windows to allow natural light inside the room. When we are first introduced to Dr. Abdic he seems to be very professional when working with Megan who he initially explains how confidently works, what their sessions will consist off, and redirects their relationship to that of a client and counselor. Megan explains that she is a wife but also enjoys being promiscuous and makes advances on Dr. Abdic, but he initially redirects her to understand why she acts that way and finds out she finds comfort in being sexually expressive. As their sessions progress, she starts becoming more forward and opens up about her losing her child and starts hugging and rubbing against Dr. Abdic. At this stage, he starts becoming unprofessional and becomes involved with Megan sexually and she goes to him for comfort outside of their sessions. Eventually, Megan goes missing and Dr. Abdic is brought in for questioning by the police department. In order to clear his name, he tells the detective everything in regards to their counseling sessions to their personal relationship and is let go and continues to practice afterward. At this point, we find out Megan was murdered and was pregnant with someone's child aside from Dr. Abdic and her husband, but the police do tell Megan's husband about the sessions and what was discussed in addition to their sexual relationship. Overall Dr. Abdic was unprofessional throughout the film and the counseling was conducted in the modern day. Part 2 There are several ethical issues present within the film in regards to Dr.
Abdic such as dual relationships, confidentiality issues, and the violation of the principles of nonmaleficence, beneficence, and fidelity. A dual relationship was started with Megan that took advantage of her vulnerability and according to Welfel (2015) the power difference made Megan feel weaker than Dr. Abdic and during her times of vulnerability she reached out and it was his obligation to maintain their client and counselor relationship. By becoming intimate with Megan she continued to lean on Dr. Abdic when confronted with dilemmas and moments of weakness and continued to go to his home or bring her to his home almost daily. He did not abide by the ethical principle of fidelity by breaking the trust to help her professionally by crossing the line into an intimate
relationship. In regards to Dr. Abdic’s interaction with the police, he broke confidentiality and told them everything in regards to their sessions and their relationship so he would be released from custody. Dr. Abdic did not abide by the ethical principles of nonmaleficence and beneficence because he was thinking about what was in his best interest rather than Megan’s who at this point could be hurt by her husband when told about the infidelity and at this point in the film she is still missing. According to Welfel (2015) the proper step should have been to contact his attorney in addition to not releasing any confidential information unless court ordered to do so. Due to his actions, he potentially caused harm due to their intimate relationship and did not gain consent to share all of the confidential information. Because Megan was missing Dr. Abdic should have been thinking what was in her best interest rather than his own and focused on ensuring that he marital issues and concerns should have stayed confidential in case her husband was responsible for her disappearance which could result in him hurting her. Although Dr. Abdic is released he is still a potential suspect and continues to practice and sees Rachel a client who is trying to figure out what happened to Megan although he does not break confidentiality when she probs. Dr. Abdic was very unprofessional and had many ethical issues that hindered his ability to help his clients specifically Megan.
Karmen is a 50-year-old married who told her psychiatrist that she was considering suicide through overdosing on Advil. She complains of severe back pain that has left her with a “poor mood”. She talked about the injury for a long period of time. When doctors did not validate her injury, she described feeling abandoned. Karmen had gained weight and was upset about that. She did not take making suicidal comments seriously and often just used them as a threat towards her husband. She craved the attention of the doctors, and was flirtatious with the person who interviewed her. Karmen’s husband said that she talked about suicide on a regular basis. Karmen became sexually active early in life and has always gone for older men.
The case of Marguerite M presents an ethical dilemma. Medical ethics play a special role in medicine and is directly concerned with its practice. Its role has continued to evolve as changes develop in
The ethical principle of nonmaleficence demands to first do no harm and in this case protect the patient from harm since she cannot protect. Nurses must be aware in situations such as this, that they are expected to advocate for patients in a right and reasonable way. The dilemma with nonmaleficence is that Mrs. Boswell has no chance of recovery because of her increasing debilitating mental incapability and the obvious harm that outweighs the intended benefits. If the decision were to continue treatment, suffering of the patient and family would be evident. Autonomy is the right to making own decisions and freedom to choose a plan of action. When making decisions regarding treatment of another person, it is important to respect the expressed wishes of the individual. John says that his mother would want to live as long as she could, but questions arise related to her quality of life and perception of prolonged suffering by prolonging the dying process. In BOOK states that quality of life changes throughout one’s life ...
Sim, J (1997). Ethical Decision Making in Therapy Practice. Oxford: Reed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd. p.16.
For example, other staff may engage in crime using Nancy’s gun, or she may also engage in violence with other staff members. In my suggestion, Nancy, other than carrying a gun for her own boyfriend, she should rethink as was going to apply the same action on her own patients/clients. She should apply the same ethical and professional principle for her boyfriend as she applies to her patients such as respect for persons, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. More importantly, Nancy’s boyfriend, Joe, was dying for the true love although his inappropriate communication between Nancy lead to the incorrect action by her (Buchbinder & Shanks, 2012,
Over the course of their therapeutic relationship, Dr. Davenport violates client confidentiality as it is described by the American Counseling
The field of clinical mental health is one of great reward, but also one of grave responsibility. It is the duty of the counselor to provide the client with a safe environment and an open mind, in order to foster a healthy therapeutic relationship. The majority of mental health counselors would never intentionally harm their clients; however; good intentions are not enough to ensure that wrong will not occur. The ethical expectations and boundaries are regulated by both laws and professional codes. When discussing ethics, one must realize there are two categories, mandatory and aspirational. (Corey, Corey & Callanan, 2007)
Ethics in the counselling and psychotherapy protects the client and the therapist involved in the therapeutic relationship and the therapeutic process as a whole; with the concepts that act as a guide for the therapists in provision of good practice and care for the client. The framework is built on values of counselling and psychotherapy; principles of trustworthiness, autonomy, fidelity, justice, beneficence, non-maleficence and self-respect, and provides standards of good practice and care for the practitioner (BACP, 2010). Ethical framework contributes to the development of the therapeutic relationship and process by assisting therapist’s decisions, and guides their behaviour and proceedings within their legal rights and duties. The ethical frame is structured on the boundaries of the therapeutic relationship and the therapists should be aware of their categories and be responsible for their forms. Monitoring and being aware of what goes on in and out of the room physically, emotionally and psychologically is primarily the duty of the therapist.
Sexual relationships with previous client, resident, patient, consumers are considered dual relationships and are addressed in Statement 6 (above). He might be falling for a client which may lead to a sexual relationship. For obvious reasons it will not be in the best interest of client in helping with their problems. Judgment, reasoning, and responsibility to his client is compromised.
During her early career she has practiced as a psychiatric nurse in acute care and in community settings. She is faculty member in department of Nursing at the California State University at Los Angeles, professor
Nora lives in a dream world, a child fantasy, where everything is perfect, and everything makes sense. She thinks that the world would never condemn a woman who tries to save her husband's life or protect a dying father. When confronted by Krogstad, who tells her it is against the law to sign someone else's signature, she responds: " This I refuse to believe. A daughter hasn't a right to protect her dying father from anxiety and care? A wife hasn't a right to save her husband's life? I don't know much about laws, but I'm sure that somewhere in the books these things are allowed." Nora simply does not understand the ways of the world, and the final realization that she is in real danger of risking hers and her husband's reputation, and worse, makes her snap out of the childish dream she had been living.
Nora is presented with many choices, one of them being the option to lie to her husband, Torvald, or not to lie. Most of these tiny, white lies include when Nora tells Torvald that she has not eaten macarons. She goes about her choice to lie in a way that she believes is rational. Nora also has the foresight to weigh her options. If she lies to Torvald, they will have a happy marriage, but if Nora deceives him, everything will crumble beneath her feet. Choosing the former, Nora lives in fear that Torvald will discover her, but is happy living in falsehood. Eventually it becomes normal for Nora to lie, almost like nothing is wrong. Although, deep down inside, Nora is hiding a greater secret from Torvald, underneath all the tiny white lies. This falsehood regards a large sum of money that she borrows to save her husband 's life. Nora has acquired a lump sum from Nils Krogstad, that she knows she does not have the means to pay back in full by his set deadline. Nora’s fear of Torvald finding out weighs heavily in her decision of how to go about breaking even with
Nora decides not to confide in Dr. Rank because he professes his love for her. She realizes that the friendship is not what she thought and feels somewhat of a betrayal and mistrust. Dr. Rank asked if telling Nora of his feelings was mean and Nora explains that it wasn’t, but it was quite unnecessary. Nora explains to Dr. Rank that he filled the position of her childhood maids. She would talk to the maids and they never tried to improve her. Dr. Rank was that friend, but he changed their friendship by wanting more from
...dlike mentality and needs to grow before she can raise her own children. Her defiance of Torvald, when he refuses to let her leave, reflects her epiphany that she isn't obligated to let Torvald dictate her actions. The height of Nora's realization comes when she tells Torvald that her duty to herself is as strong as her duty as a wife and mother. She now sees that she is a human being before she is a wife and mother and she owes herself to explore her personality, ambitions, and beliefs.
Nora’s life struggle began at a young age. Her father treated her like an inhuman object, and now her husband has done the same thing. After many years of maintaining her “perfect” life, Nora could no longer live like this. She finally stands up for herself and makes a choice to leave her family. This decision is completely reasonable. It is unimaginable to think anyone could treat another person so crudely. No person should be molded into being someone they are not. It is unfair to treat a loved one like an object instead of an equal human being. Unfortunately there are many women today who find themselves in the same position in Nora. Many of which do not have the strength to confront, and to pry themselves from grips of their abusers. It is possible that the greatest miracle will be Nora, out on her own, finding her true self.