|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
 |
Answer to Case Study #1:Isabel has handled the interaction inappropriately because lying to a client is unethical and potentially dangerous as it can leave the client without the means and knowledge to protect herself. Even though it could be awkward, since they know each other, Isabel has an obligation as a health care provider to inform the client about the true nature of her infection and how to prevent future infection. If Isabel feels that she is not the appropriate counselor to work with Sarah because their husbands are co-workers, she should refer Sarah to another health care provider who can remain more neutral. Isabel is correct in demonstrating condom use to Sarah (although other family planning methods should be discussed as well) and in discussing strategies for condom negotiation with her husband, but this indirect approach is not sufficient to address the situation. Sarah must know that she has an STI and how it was caused. Her husband must get treatment to prevent reinfection. Lying to a client to “save a marriage” or for any other reason is always inappropriate.
|