Policy Identification Ohio Walden University

policy Identification ohiowalden Universitypolicy Identification this P

This paper is written with the student referencing internship work hours completed at Access Ohio. Access Ohio provides both outpatient and inpatient treatment for substance use disorder (SUD) and mental health conditions. The student will be working in the outpatient area with clients who may be experiencing SUD and mental health issues. The paper discusses various laws, regulations, and policies governing services for clients with SUD, including Ohio laws and guidelines established by the NASW and CSWE. It examines specific policies such as Ohio Revised Code (ORC) 2305.51 and the Ohio Administrative Code (OAC) related to duty to warn and protect, documenting progress, and case management services. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding and following existing laws, advocating for policy enhancements or revisions, and collaborating with supervisors and policy makers to improve service delivery and social justice outcomes for clients facing SUD and mental health challenges.

Paper For Above instruction

The intersection of legal mandates, ethical considerations, and social justice principles significantly influences the practice of addiction professionals, especially when addressing complex scenarios such as a clinician suspecting a colleague’s substance abuse endangering patient safety. This paper explores the relevant Ohio laws and professional guidelines that structure responses to such situations, emphasizing the duty to warn and protect, confidentiality boundaries, and advocacy for policy improvements.

Understanding the Duty to Warn and Protect in Ohio

In Ohio, the duty to warn and protect is primarily governed by Ohio Revised Code (ORC) 2305.51 and the Ohio Administrative Code (OAC). ORC 2305.51 states that mental health professionals or organizations are not liable for violence committed by a client or patient, provided they adhere to specific obligations, including the duty to act if a client poses an imminent threat. The law explicitly requires professionals to warn potential victims and notify authorities if they believe a client presents a credible risk of harm. The OAC elaborates on these policies by providing detailed procedures on documenting threats, assessing risk, and implementing safety plans, ensuring that legal and ethical responsibilities are balanced with confidentiality considerations.

Origins and Necessity of the Law

The creation of these laws responded to high-profile incidents where untreated mental health or behavioral issues resulted in violence. Cases such as the 1999 Columbine High School shooting underscored the need for mental health professionals to act decisively when a client’s behavior suggests imminent danger. Consequently, laws were enacted to protect potential victims and clarify clinicians' responsibilities, helping to prevent harm while respecting client rights. These statutes aimed to close legal gaps, mandate timely intervention, and establish clear guidelines for when and how professionals should intervene, especially given the delicate balance between confidentiality and public safety.

Application in Clinical Practice

Consider a scenario where a clinician suspects a colleague is abusing substances during work hours, potentially impairing their ability to perform surgeries safely. While the clinician’s first instinct might be to confront or address the colleague directly, legal obligations in Ohio require reporting to supervisors or designated authorities if the impairment poses a threat to patient safety. This aligns with the duty to warn and protect, which prioritizes the safety of clients and the public. The clinician must document observations objectively, report concerns following agency protocols, and ensure that the appropriate safety measures are enacted without violating confidentiality obligations. Such actions exemplify legal adherence and ethical responsibility rooted in the laws governing mental health and addiction services.

Advocating for Policy Enhancements

Despite existing frameworks, gaps and limitations remain. An area for enhancement could involve creating explicit protections for professionals reporting colleagues’ impairments, such as immunity clauses that shield whistleblowers from retaliation. Additionally, establishing clearer protocols for inter-agency communication regarding impairments could facilitate early intervention. An illustrative addendum might include mandatory education programs focusing on recognizing signs of impairment and understanding reporting procedures. These measures could mitigate fears of legal repercussions, reduce stigma associated with addiction among healthcare professionals, and reinforce a culture of safety and accountability.

Expected Outcomes and Social Justice Implications

If such policy improvements were enacted, the anticipated outcomes include increased reporting of impairment concerns, reduced incidence of impaired clinicians performing high-stakes procedures, and enhanced overall safety for patients and staff. Social justice frameworks emphasize equitable treatment, protecting vulnerable populations, and promoting human rights. Strengthening laws and policies to support addiction professionals in safeguarding their colleagues and clients aligns with these principles by fostering an environment of transparency, accountability, and compassionate care.

Conclusion

Legal and ethical considerations deeply influence the roles and responsibilities of addiction professionals in Ohio. The duty to warn and protect codified in state law underscores the importance of safeguarding clients and the public from imminent harm, balancing confidentiality with safety. While current laws provide a structured foundation, ongoing advocacy and policy refinement are crucial to address existing gaps, support professionals, and uphold social justice objectives. Through continued education, communication, and legislative engagement, addiction practitioners can ensure ethical fidelity and public safety in their vital work.

References

• Lambert, S. F. (2011). Ethical and legal issues in addictions outcome research. Counseling Outcome Research and Evaluation, 2(1), 25–36.
• Courtwright, D. T. (2012). Addiction and the science of history. Addiction, 107(3), 486–492.
• Robinson, S. M. (2017). “Alcoholic” or “Person with alcohol use disorder”? Applying person-first diagnostic terminology in the clinical domain. Substance Abuse, 38(1), 9-14.
• Ohio Revised Code (ORC) 2305.51. (2018). Mental health professional or organization not liable for violent behavior by client or patient. Ohio Laws & Rules.
• Ohio Administrative Code (OAC). (2018). Duty to protect requirements. Ohio Laws & Rules.
• National Association of Social Workers (NASW). (2018). The personal is political: Why social workers must take action to protect abortion access and reproductive rights.
• Council on Social Work Education (CSWE). (2015). Competency Areas for Social Work Practice.
• Lawriter. (2018). Ohio Laws and Rules related to SUD case management services.
• Additional reputable sources providing context on mandatory reporting and confidentiality laws in mental health and addiction services.