What is it about?

Most therapists certainly want to practice ethically. At the same time, this article explains how well-intentioned individual therapy practitioners unknowingly and far too frequently may commit serious violations of therapists' two core ethical principles: Beneficence (Do as much good as possible) and Non-Maleficence (Do no harm).

Featured Image

Why is it important?

Reading the impressive research and illustrative case examples described in this article will hopefully raise therapists' awareness of how individual treatment with a client who is married frequently leads to inadvertent violations of beneficence and non-maleficence. The article concludes with several suggested new standards of care designed to both maximize the therapy's benefits and minimize the treatment's potential for harming the client. Yet change can be challenging. The true importance of this article will depend on the extent to which readers prove open to this new perspective. In addition, the impact of this article will depend on how many therapists will be willing to learn the additional skills that implementing the recommendations may require.

Perspectives

I feel wary of readers' reactions to this article. How much controversy will it raise? At the same time, having been aware of the concerns that the article highlights for too many of my five decades thus far of clinical practice, I feel greatly relieved to at last have spoken up.

Susan Heitler, PhD

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: Ethical risks in conducting individual therapy with a married client: The case for new standards of care., Practice Innovations, July 2026, American Psychological Association (APA),
DOI: 10.1037/pri0000338.
You can read the full text:

Read

Resources

Contributors

The following have contributed to this page