When working with multiple clients, the human services professional is likely to encounter a significant need to maintain confidentiality within multiple relationships that include fully understood and addressed informed consent practices. Oftentimes, the individual human services professional will determine the frameworks for maintaining confidentiality.

Please come to this week’s Seminar prepared to discuss the following:

•How might you expect to ethically maintain confidentiality in your relationships with clients while ensuring that you are meeting the needs of each client? What role will “secrets” play in your counseling relationships?
•Explain the essential components of a family therapist’s informed consent document. What additional information might also be included in such a disclosure document?
•How might this information best be given to the client?

Reading :
Chapter 11: “Ethical Issues in Couples and Family Therapy”

Couples and family therapeutic orientations apply a systems approach in defining and interpreting psychological challenges. As you will discover in this week’s readings, unique ethical concerns arise when dysfunctions are considered from a systems theory orientation

3 Simple steps to get your paper done
Step 1	Step 2	Step 3
Place Order	Down to work	Paper is Ready!
Takes just a few minutes!	Best writer takes the order	Access via your account

Shoe Leonard’s boasts on its sign that it is the largest shoe store in the world. Although traditionally a family-owned business, when Mr. Leonard passed away he

left majority ownership to Dave Deedan, a non-relative who has worked at the store for decades.

Dave retains Andrew Haynus, a local attorney, having decided it was time to draft a will. Before Haynus is finished with the will, he thinks of a great way to help

Shoe Leonard’s make even more money. Haynus decides he’d like to present Dave with his idea and do the deal together. He’s willing to put up $50,000 (he’s going to

take out a third mortgage on his house to do so) and wants some say in the decision-making process. The deal has nothing to do with the representation. After all,

Haynus has simply been retained to draft Dave’s will, so he figures Rule 1.8 probably doesn’t apply.

The work for Dave also reminds Haynus that he needs a new pair of loafers, so he plans on visiting Shoe Leonard’s tomorrow to buy some.

Haynus practices in a state which has adopted the Model Rules in full as found at the ABA website http://www.abanet.org/cpr/mrpc/mrpc_toc.html, including Rule 1.8

Conflict of Interest: Current Clients: Specific Rules. How does Rule 1.8 apply to the two business transactions which Haynus wants to enter into with his client (the

big business deal and the shoe purchase)?

What should Andrew do or say when presenting Dave with his idea for Shoe Leonard’s? What should he do or say when trying on loafers in the store?

3 Simple steps to get your paper done
Step 1	Step 2	Step 3
Place Order	Down to work	Paper is Ready!
Takes just a few minutes!	Best writer takes the order	Access via your account

You are working as a federal law clerk in the federal court in Phoenix, Arizona. The case of Stewart v. Arizona has recently come on the docket. Stewart is

currently sitting in prison in Arizona. He came to be there through the following facts:

In early 2009, a rash of seemingly related murders ravaged the area of Flagstaff, Arizona. Police soon announced that they were on the hunt for a serial killer. On

March 14, 2009, Stewart retained the services of Careful and Cautious, LLP, a law firm in Flagstaff to help with his legal troubles. During the initial consultation,

Stewart told James Careful the following:

Well, Mr. Careful, the truth is that I’m behind the six recent murders in the area. I’m really a good guy and I hate to kill people. But sometimes, I just can’t

help myself. I don’t want to continue killing people but these voices in my head… they’re just so logical and irresistible.

James Careful promptly called the local police and reported his conversation with Stewart. Stewart was arrested for capital murder. A later search of his house

turned up the murder weapon in two of the cases and files on Stewart’s computer that contained information on two more victims. Stewart was put on trial in the Fall of

2009. At trial, Stewart was represented by a public defense and James Careful testified against him. Careful related the entire March 14 conversation to the jury.

After a three week trial, Stewart was found guilty of six counts of capital murder and was sentenced to death. He summarily appealed his sentence. Two months ago, the

Arizona Supreme Court denied his appeal.

Stewart, through his new appointed attorneys (paid for by a non-profit anti-death penalty organization), has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the

federal district court for the District of Arizona. Among other arguments, Stewart claims that his rights were violated by Arizona because information and testimony

was used against him that related to his confidential discussions with his then attorney, James Careful. The state claims that the use of the confidential

communication with his attorney was proper in this case.

Joe Judge asks you to research applicable law and to write an essay discussing whether the use of Careful’s information and testimony regarding his conversation

with Stewart violated Stewart’s rights. Mr. Judge tells you that since you’re in the 9th Circuit court of appeals’ jurisdiction, cases from the 9th Circuit would be

best. However, cases from other circuits are better than nothing and can be used in a pinch.

Please prepare the requested essay.

An IRAC-style essay is appropriate for this assignment.

3 Simple steps to get your paper done
Step 1	Step 2	Step 3
Place Order	Down to work	Paper is Ready!
Takes just a few minutes!	Best writer takes the order	Access via your account

The “adversary system” is the fundamental concept behind American jurisprudence.

It is assumed by our system that when you have 2 people on opposite sides who are

trying to win, the party that has the truth on its side will ultimately prevail. Of course, as we all know, it doesn’t always work that way; but that’s our system.

Many Continental European systems use the “civil law” method. Under that system, all the lawyers in the case are responsible to help in the “search for the truth.”

If one lawyer has information that would help the other side or comes to agree with the other side’s view, he or she has the right and/or duty to say so. Which system

do you think is more effective and why? Also, do you see any constitutional problems with applying the civil law system to the U.S.?

For this assignment, in addition to answering the above questions, I would like you to find at least one case (which can be done most easily from Lexis) in which

the limits of the adversary system were discussed or tested. The subject matter of the case itself can be anything, but the focus should be whether an attorney or

firm’s responsibility to a client or court outweighs some other “greater” or “moral” responsibility. For this case, please briefly discuss the ethical issue and how

the court resolved it.

3 Simple steps to get your paper done
Step 1	Step 2	Step 3
Place Order	Down to work	Paper is Ready!
Takes just a few minutes!	Best writer takes the order	Access via your account