Her condition was not beyond my ability, but just because the client needed more attention and supervision, which I was not able to provide at my facility. However, the ethical code requires that the correct procedure be followed. For instance, I have to identify myself and give proof of my claim. In other words, I was required to fax the release form to verify my claim. In addition, I should also state my intentions clearly for seeking the information. It will also be logical and legitimate if I gave the client a referral letter to the client to be used by the other facility. This would act as evidence that I am the one who referred her to the respective facility. Having the release form alone does not make much sense and gives no evidence that the patient was released on the referral terms. As such, the other facility is justified to decline my request. It is ethical and in line with the codes. Concisely, I cannot use the release form that the client signed initially in order to obtain information about her condition in the other facility without providing information that shows I am the one who referred her to the new facility (Carroll & Gannon, 2007).

Vignette 3

There are both ethical and therapeutic issues emerging from the scenario. For instance, the client confines a lot of information to me before developing post-traumatic symptoms because of injuries sustained at the place of work. The insurance covering body, however, declines meeting her psychotherapy cost. I am required to prove to the board that she suffered from psychological injuries and has been undergoing psychotherapy even before the injuries. However, several pertinent ethical and therapeutic issues need to be considered before giving the testimony.

Although confidentiality is highly esteemed in this profession, exceptions also exist under certain exceptional circumstances as such. However, it is technical and risky in the sense that by disclosing...

In addition, the need for the client's consent to allow me share the information is necessary. The client can also go ahead and sue me for disclosing professional information against the requirements, especially if the outcome is negative.
However, this is a desperate situation that calls or risk taking for the sake of the client. It is already evident that the client is fighting for compensation. She cannot testify on her own because of her condition; therefore, I am the only confidant with the relevant information that may see her claim successful in this case (Mappes, Robb, & Engels, 2007).

From the scenarios above, I have gained skills necessary for making a sound decision pertaining to critical situations when police or Intelligence units demand client's information. My obligation to safeguard information the client provides. Under such circumstances, I will not conform to the demands but rather keep the information private even where the client is linked to a crime. It is only under certain exceptional circumstances, as the ones mentioned above that would demand that I share confidential information entrusted to me by the client during the therapy.