Landmark Legal Cases, Informed Consent: Implications for the Counseling Field

Many seek counseling each year and do not understand what services are offered, or even that the counselor they see is required by law to maintain the confidentiality of the conversation that the two of them are going to have. These issues have been clouding in the past and have led to many court cases that have helped counselors in every state outline exactly what is required of the document. The American Counseling Association (ACA), and the associations of the different states, have specific ethical guidelines which require members to provide new clients with an informed consent document to sign. State and federal legal cases have shown the need for a document which spells out what the counseling services of a particular practice are, what confidentiality is, and oftentimes how the counseling services will be paid (Walsh & Dasenbrook, 2005).

The American Counseling Association recently updated its code of ethics which includes a section (A.2) which outlines informed consent. Counselors must:

"inform clients about issues such as, but not limited to, the following: the purposes, goals, techniques, procedures, limitations, potential risks, and benefits of services; the counselor's qualifications, credentials, and relevant experience; continuation of services upon the incapacitation or death of a counselor; and other pertinent information. Counselors take steps to ensure that clients...

Clients have the right to confidentiality and to be provided with an explanation of its limitations (including how supervisors and/or treatment team professionals are involved); to obtain clear information about their records; to participate in the ongoing counseling plans; and to refuse any services or modality change and to be advised of the consequences of such refusal" (ACA, 2005).
This is a comprehensive listing of the counselor's duties as required by an ethical practitioner, but also outlined due to the precedent of law.

Counseling law follows medical law and most of the cases that have to do with informed consent have been brought against doctors. One such landmark case was that of Canterbury v. Spence (1972). In this case, Dr. Spence operated on Mr. Canterbury who was 19 years old at the time. The patient needed was in Washington, D.C., but, being considered a minor at the time of the incident, he needed to have the consent of his mother to have the operation performed. The plaintiffs in the case said that the doctor was negligent because he did not fully explain the dangers of the operation to either the mother or the son. The district court said that the doctor did inform the clients, but upon appeal the doctor was found…