Boundary Issues and Multiple Relationships in Genetic Counseling Supervision: Supervisor, Non-supervisor, and Student Perspectives
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
Boundary issues and multiple relationships potentially affect all supervision interactions. Boundary crossings are departures from the strictest professional role and may or may not benefit supervisees. Boundary violations are outside common practice and may place supervisees at significant risk. Multiple relationships occur when supervisors concurrently or consecutively hold two or more roles with supervisees. Studies in other fields indicate supervisors and supervisees may be uncertain about professional conduct regarding these issues. In this study, genetic counselor supervisors (n = 126), non-supervisors (n = 72), and genetic counseling students (n = 129) completed an anonymous survey investigating four major questions: 1) Are various boundary issues and multiple relationships perceived as differentially appropriate? 2) Do supervisor, non-supervisor, and student perceptions differ? 3) What challenging situations have respondents experienced? and 4) What management strategies did they use? There was general agreement among groups in their appropriateness ratings of 56 hypothetical supervisor behaviors, although supervisor ratings tended to reflect stricter boundaries regarding the appropriateness of interactions than student ratings. A majority rated unavoidable boundary crossings and supervisor multiple relationships involving an academic relationship as most appropriate, and romantic/sexual multiple relationships and/or boundary violations as least appropriate. Analysis of respondents’ actual challenging situations revealed many involved boundary violations, placed students at risk of harm, and often resulted in student compliance.
- Barnett, J. E., Lazarus, A. A., Vasquez, M. J. T., Moorehead-Slaughter, O., & Johnson, W. B. (2007). Boundary issues and multiple relationships: fantasy and reality. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 38, 401–410. CrossRef
- Bernard, J. M., & Goodyear, R. K. (2004). Fundamentals of clinical supervision (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
- Biaggio, M., Paget, T. L., & Chenoweth, M. S. (1997). A model for ethical management of faculty-student dual relationships. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 28, 184–189. CrossRef
- Blevins-Knabe, B. (1992). The ethics of dual relationships in higher education. Ethics & Behavior, 2, 151–163. CrossRef
- Burian, B. K., & O’Connor Slimp, A. (2000). Social dual-role relationships during internship: a decision making model. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 31, 332–338. CrossRef
- Callanan, N., Eubanks, S., LeRoy, B.S., & McCarthy Veach, P. (2007). What lies beneath? Hidden dynamics in supervisor/supervisee relationships. Presented at the National Society of Genetic Counselors Annual Education Conference, Kansas City, Missouri
- DeJulio, L. M., & Berkman, C. S. (2003). Nonsexual multiple role relationships: attitudes and behaviors of social workers. Ethics & Behavior, 13, 61–78. CrossRef
- Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2004). Clinical supervision: A competency-based approach. Washington: American Psychological Association. CrossRef
- Giarelli, E., & Tulman, L. (2003). Methodological issues in the use of published cartoon data. Qualitative Health Research, 13, 945–956. CrossRef
- Glass, L. L. (2003). The gray areas of boundary crossings and violations. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 57, 429–444.
- Gottlieb, M. C. (1993). Avoiding exploitative dual relationships: a decision-making model. Psychotherapy, 30, 41–48.
- Gottlieb, M. C., Robinson, K., & Younggren, J. N. (2007). Multiple relations in supervision: guidance for administrators, supervisors, and students. Professional Psychology, Research and Practice, 38, 241–247. CrossRef
- Gutheil, T. G., & Gabbard, G. O. (1993). The concept of boundaries in clinical practice: theoretical and risk-management dimensions. American Journal of Psychiatry, 150, 188–196.
- Gutheil, T. G., & Gabbard, G. O. (1998). Misuses and misunderstandings of boundary theory in clinical and regulatory settings. American Journal of Psychiatry, 155, 409–414.
- Gutheil, T. G., & Simon, R. I. (2002). Non-sexual boundary crossings and boundary violations: the ethical dimension. Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 25, 585–592.
- Heru, A. M., Strong, D. R., Price, M., & Recupero, P. R. (2004). Boundaries in psychotherapy supervision. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 58, 76–89.
- Jacobs, C. (1991). Violations of the supervisory relationship: an ethical and educational blind spot. Social Worker, 36, 130–135.
- Johnson, W. B. (2007). Transformational supervision: when supervisors mentor. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 38, 259–267. CrossRef
- Keith-Spiegel, P., Whitley, B. E., Jr., Balogh, D. W., Perkins, D. V., & Wittig, A. F. (2002). The ethics of teaching: A casebook (2nd ed.). Mahweh: Erlbaum.
- Kertesz, R. (2002). Dual relationships in psychotherapy in Latin America. In A. A. Lazarus & O. Zur (Eds.), Dual relationships and psychotherapy (pp. 329–334). New York: Springer.
- Kitchener, K. S. (1988). Dual role relationships: what makes them so problematic? Journal of Counseling and Development, 67, 217–221.
- Ladany, N., Lehrman-Waterman, D., Molinaro, M., & Wolgast, B. (1999). Psychotherapy supervisor ethical practices: adherence to guidelines, the supervisory working alliance, and supervisee satisfaction. The Counseling Psychologist, 27, 443–475. CrossRef
- Lindh, H. L., McCarthy Veach, P., Cikanek, K., & LeRoy, B. S. (2003). A survey of clinical supervision in genetic counseling. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 12, 23–41. CrossRef
- McCarthy Veach, P., & LeRoy, B. S. (2009). Student supervision: Strategies for providing direction, guidance, and support. In W. R. Uhlmann, J. L. Schuette, & B. M. Yashar (Eds.), A guide to genetic counseling (2nd ed., pp. 401–434). Hoboken: Wiley.
- O’Connor Slimp, P. A., & Burian, B. K. (1994). Multiple role relationships during internships: consequences and recommendations. Professional Psychology, Research and Practice, 25, 39–45. CrossRef
- Pearson, B., & Piazza, N. (1997). Classification of dual relationships in the helping professions. Counselor Education and Supervision, 37, 89–100.
- Pope, K. S. (1991). Dual relationships in psychotherapy. Ethics and Behavior, 1, 22–34.
- Pope, K. S., & Vetter, V. A. (1992). Ethical dilemmas encountered by members of the American Psychological Association: a national survey. American Psychologist, 47, 397–411. CrossRef
- Smith, M., Freivogel, M.E., & Parrott, S. (2004). Professional status survey 2008. Available at: http://www.nsgc.org
- Sonne, J. L. (1994). Multiple relationships: does the new ethics code answer the right questions? Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 25, 336–343. CrossRef
- Weil, J. (2000). Introduction to special issue: supervision for practicing genetic counselors. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 9, 375–378. CrossRef
- Younggren, J. N., & Gottlieb, N. C. (2004). Managing risk when handling multiple relationships. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 35, 255–260. CrossRef
- Boundary Issues and Multiple Relationships in Genetic Counseling Supervision: Supervisor, Non-supervisor, and Student Perspectives
Journal of Genetic Counseling
Volume 20, Issue 1 , pp 35-48
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Clinical supervision
- Genetic counseling
- Multiple relationships
- Boundary issues
- Boundary violations
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Educational Psychology, University of Minnesota, 250 Education Sciences Building, 56 E. River Road, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA
- 2. University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, USA
- 3. Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, Institute of Human Genetics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA