Thanks for the responses so far. I appreciate the way the definition of
therapist can be extended but I am also asking an ehtical question. As a
clarification I meant dual relationships in terms of (as the other Libby
defines)
"a professional who works in different capacities"
Part of my reason for seeking comment is that were my practice to be questioned
by a professional organisation, the organisation would take into account what
is considered appropriate practice with other practitioners in the field ie you
guys!!! (as well as my supervisor's reports of our discussions relating to the
client, Chris's, as my constellation colleague, comments about the workshop etc)
My query is partly, and I stress only partly, prompted by a situation earlier
this year when a client of mine suicided. I had been seeing him reasonably
regularly over a two year period and he had attended a number of Chris and my
constellation workshops. The most recent was two weeks before his death. He had
had previous attempts. His family were very grateful for the support he
received from (a number of) professionals. So I did not end up before Coroner's
Court or answering a complaint to a professional body from family members. But
I could have.
This is an unusual situation. And having clients attend workshops can benefit
the therapy but if it "goes wrong" what are the justifications/processes? In
the sort of context described above arguements in addition to definition of
therapist would be useful.
Thanks
Libby
