11.3 Boundary Crossings and Boundary Violations
At times, counselors may consider deviating from boundaries they have instilled to benefit the client and therapeutic relationship. These deviations exist on a spectrum ranging from countertransference to boundary crossings and violations. Counselors experience countertransference when their own “stuff” is activated when working with clients (Schames, 1981). While countertransference is a normal aspect of counseling work, counselors can cause harm by neglecting these feelings, denying them, or not acknowledging them, resulting in boundary crossings. Additionally, if they act on urges or feelings associated with their countertransference, counselors can commit boundary violations. Some writers believe boundary crossings to be “bad practice” as they consider them a “slippery slope” to boundary violations, which result in client harm (Brown, 2008, pg.505).
Many now refute this idea and believe that boundary crossings can be handled ethically and with client welfare in mind, sometimes resulting in client benefit. It is up to the counselor to handle these situations appropriately and honorably. Boundary deviations may emerge out of choice or necessity and can result in changes to roles involved in the therapeutic or dual relationship. Counselors must engage in formal ethical decision-making processes with appropriate documentation when considering deviations to set boundaries to protect clients and their licensure (Zur, 2009). Counselors must also not prioritize their legal safety and practice too defensively over client welfare, which causes undue harm to clients (Zur, 2009).
Boundary Crossings
Boundary crossings involve slight departures from traditional clinical boundaries that are generally benign and cause no harm to clients (Brown, 2008). Boundary crossings are best understood and navigated in the context of each unique client, therapeutic relationship, and situation (Moleski, 2005; Barnett, 2007). Examples of boundary crossings include but are certainly not limited to, shaking a client’s hand, self-disclosure intended for the client’s benefit, or seeing a client in the parking lot (Barnett, 2007). ACA code A.6.b. that provides ethical guidelines for boundary extensions is included below.
It is widely accepted that counseling will include some boundary crossings, and some permeability in boundaries may be favorable over overly rigid boundaries depending on the client and situation (Barnett, 2007). The best practice is clearly communicating and enforcing boundaries with clients and navigating permeability as necessary. The primary considerations for counselors include the intention of the boundary crossing (is it in the best interest of the client?) and the spectrum of influence (is it beneficial, neutral, or harmful to the client?). Is the counselor aware of their own “stuff” coming up (countertransference) in the relationship? Does enforcing the boundary provide a therapeutic benefit based on treatment goals? Some boundary crossings may benefit the client or the therapeutic relationship by enhancing trust, connection, and safety.
On the other hand, enforcing boundaries may also provide therapeutic benefits, and the counselor thinks through this. A clinician extending the session to help a client in crisis may be an example of a boundary crossing that is beneficial to the client, so long as the extension does not become the norm and does not jeopardize another client’s session time. Additional considerations in extending boundaries include client welfare, the client’s treatment plan, diagnosis, vulnerabilities, culture, values, power dynamics, sense of autonomy, trust, impact on the relationship, and equity among clients (Barnett, 2007).
Other boundary crossings may have neutral consequences. Some neutral boundary crossings can occur by chance, such as inadvertently seeing a client at the grocery store, which is a likely example of this type of boundary crossing. If a neutral boundary crossing occurs by counselor choice, they are asked to reflect on the intent behind crossing a boundary if there is no benefit. On the other hand, some boundary crossings can cause harm to clients and should be avoided. It is also possible that boundary crossings that were once beneficial or neutral can eventually become harmful if not handled correctly and promptly. In these cases, the counselor is likely getting into boundary violation territory.
Boundary Violations
Boundary violations are “departures from accepted practice that are harmful, exploitative, prejudicial and in direct conflict with the integrity of the therapeutic process” (Brown, 2008, pg. 505). Examples include but are not limited to scheduling an attractive client at the end of the day and extending the session out of personal interest, meeting a client at a different location, inappropriate use of touch, inappropriate use of self-disclosure that is not for client benefit, and any sexual remarks or contact toward a client (Barnett, 2007).
Boundary violations may leave the client feeling like the counselor is exploiting them, acting unfairly, or placing too high expectations on them (Woody, 1998). Additionally, boundary violations can communicate or reinforce a sense of health to clients in unhealthy and harmful situations. Sexual relationships with current and former clients are regarded as severe boundary violations in that they inherently cause harm due to the complex power dynamics in play, and they will be discussed later in this chapter. Boundary violations involve actions that most respected counselors would not take and would not recommend to others. They are actions a reasonable professional would not want to share in a well-lit room or publish in a news article. Because a counselor’s primary objectives are to protect client welfare and avoid harm, boundary violations are unethical as they go against the ethical principles of beneficence and non-maleficence that guide the field.
The ACA (2014) Code of Ethics highlights how counselors consider extending boundaries:
“Counselors consider the risks and benefits of extending current counseling relationships beyond conventional parameters. Examples include attending a client’s formal ceremony (e.g., A wedding/ commitment ceremony or graduation), purchasing a service or product provided by a client (excepting unrestricted bartering), and visiting a client’s ill family member in the hospital. In extending these boundaries, counselors take appropriate professional precautions such as informed consent, consultation, supervision and documentation to ensure that judgment is not impaired and no harm occurs” (Standard A.6.b.).
Documentation of Boundary Crossings
Because boundary diversions are of ethical interests, counselors document them to benefit both parties. ACA code A.6.c. Guides documentation needs for boundary-related issues is presented below. Adequate documentation includes a thorough ethical decision-making process and ongoing risk management process, including supervision and consultation to address the individual counselor’s blind spots. At times, counselors can expect to harm their clients; if harm occurs, they actively document measures to repair the counseling relationship. They demonstrate the appropriateness of their actions around boundary diversions based on their comfort level, discussing their clinical actions with a “well-lit room” of colleagues or publication in a news article. Likely, they would not want to discuss or publish boundary violations with clients and thus do not engage in them.
Documentation of boundary extensions is discussed in the ACA (2014) ethical code:
“Counselors extend boundaries as described in A.6.a. and A.6.b., they must officially document, prior to the interaction (when feasible), the rationale for such an interaction, the potential benefit, and anticipated consequences for the client or former client and other individuals significantly involved with the client or former client. When unintentional harm occurs to the client or former client, or to an individual significantly involved with the client or former client, the counselor must show evidence of an attempt to remedy such harm” (Standard A.6.c.).
Key Takeaways
- Boundary deviations in counseling exist on a spectrum from countertransference to boundary crossings and violations, requiring careful navigation to prioritize client welfare.
- Boundary crossings can be ethically managed when they serve the client’s best interest, enhance trust, or support therapeutic goals, but they require intentional reflection and clear documentation.
- Boundary violations, such as inappropriate self-disclosure, exploitation, or dual relationships, are harmful, unethical, and conflict with professional integrity.
- Ethical guidelines encourage counselors to document boundary extensions thoroughly, including rationale, benefits, potential consequences, and efforts to repair harm if necessary.
- Counselors must actively engage in supervision, consultation, and ethical decision-making processes to manage boundary-related issues responsibly and avoid harm.