Former Client and a Small-Town Dating Invitation
Dr. Brooks is a licensed psychologist in a rural Nebraska town of 4,200 people. She provided 12 sessions of individual therapy to Kendra, age 38, for panic disorder and job stress. Therapy ended 22 months ago when Kendra's insurance changed; Kendra met all treatment goals. Since then, Dr. Brooks and Kendra have seen each other at the town's one grocery store and at a community fundraiser. Kendra recently sent Dr. Brooks a text message asking her to dinner 'as a date.' Dr. Brooks has no current professional relationship with Kendra or any of Kendra's family members, but Kendra's sister is on a waitlist for Dr. Brooks's therapy group. Dr. Brooks feels attracted to Kendra and believes the two-year rule has almost passed. She asks a colleague whether she can accept the invitation, whether she must disclose anything to Kendra's sister, and what she should document. Nebraska law and APA ethics apply.
1. May Dr. Brooks accept the dinner invitation now? Analyze under APA Ethics Code Standard 10.08 and Nebraska law.
Read the worked answer
No. APA Standard 10.08 prohibits sexual intimacies with a former client for at least two years after the professional relationship ends. Kendra's therapy ended 22 months ago, so the two-year period has not passed. Nebraska's unprofessional-conduct provisions also prohibit sexual relationships with clients and may cover former clients; the board could view this as exploitation. The fact that Dr. Brooks feels attracted and that the town is small does not create an exception. She should decline the invitation, avoid personal texting, and document the decision and consultation. After two years, a relationship is not automatically permitted: Dr. Brooks would still bear the burden of showing no exploitation and no harm. She should not treat Kendra's sister while any such possibility is being considered.
2. If more than two years had passed, what factors would Dr. Brooks have to consider and document before any romantic relationship?
Read the worked answer
If more than two years had passed, Standard 10.08(b) requires Dr. Brooks to demonstrate that the relationship is not exploitative, that it is not due to transference or the therapy, and that it will not harm Kendra. Factors include the length and nature of therapy, termination circumstances, Kendra's current mental status, the power differential, community impact, and whether the relationship would interfere with professional judgment. She should consult a colleague or ethics committee and document the analysis. Nebraska law must also be checked because it may remain more restrictive. Even if permitted, she should not treat Kendra's sister or any family member, and she should have a plan for referrals and records. The safest ethical choice in a small community may be to avoid the relationship and address the attraction in consultation.
3. What should Dr. Brooks do about Kendra's sister on the waitlist and about record-keeping?
Read the worked answer
Dr. Brooks should not disclose Kendra's therapy to Kendra's sister or use the sister's waitlist status to pressure Kendra. If Dr. Brooks is even considering a romantic relationship, she should refer Kendra's sister to another provider to avoid a multiple relationship and preserve trust. If she declines the date, she still should assess whether treating the sister is clinically appropriate; the sister is not a current client, but the social connection may affect treatment. She should document the consultation, the decision about the invitation, and any referral. She should keep records separate and not store personal texts in the clinical record. If the sister asks why, Dr. Brooks should give a brief, non-confidential explanation and offer referral options.