Every therapist encounters ethical dilemmas. Not occasionally – regularly.
They come in all shapes and sizes. A client discloses something that raises a safeguarding concern but asks you not to act on it. A dual relationship develops that you didn’t anticipate and aren’t sure how to handle. A client’s wellbeing and their stated wishes are pulling in different directions. You’re working at the edge of your competence and not sure whether to continue or refer on.
Some ethical dilemmas are clear-cut once you look at them properly. Others are genuinely complex – where multiple valid ethical principles are in tension and there’s no obviously right answer.
What they share is this: they require careful, considered thought. Not a quick decision made alone in the gap between sessions. Not a gut reaction. Not a retreat to the rulebook without engaging with the actual situation.
That’s where supervision comes in.
Why ethical dilemmas in counselling need more than a rulebook
The first instinct when facing an ethical dilemma is often to look for the rule that applies. To check the BACP Ethical Framework, or the NCPS Code of Ethical Practice, or whatever professional guidance you work within.
That’s a reasonable starting point. But it’s rarely sufficient.
Ethical frameworks set out principles – things like autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, fidelity, justice. They provide values and broad guidance. What they can’t do is tell you how to weigh those principles against each other in a specific, complex, real-world situation involving a real person whose life doesn’t fit neatly into any framework.
That’s the nature of ethical dilemmas. They’re dilemmas precisely because there’s a genuine tension – because following one principle pulls you in one direction and following another pulls you in a different one. The framework doesn’t resolve that tension. Careful thinking does.
The BACP Ethical Framework states clearly that practitioners will use their supervision and any other available professional resources to support and challenge how they respond to ethical situations – giving careful consideration to the best approaches to ethical problem-solving.
Supervision is explicitly named in the framework as the primary resource for ethical decision-making. That’s not incidental. It reflects something important about what supervision is actually for.
What supervision offers that independent thinking doesn’t
When you’re working through an ethical dilemma alone, you’re working with your own perspective, your own blind spots, and your own emotional responses to the situation. You may have a clear sense of what you want to do. You may be more invested in one outcome than you realise. You may be under pressure from a client, an employer, or your own anxiety about getting it wrong.
Supervision introduces a different perspective. Someone thinking alongside you who isn’t inside the situation – who can see things you can’t see because you’re too close to them.
A good supervisory conversation about an ethical dilemma does several things.
It helps you name the dilemma clearly. Sometimes the act of articulating a situation to another person reveals aspects you hadn’t consciously registered. What feels like a vague discomfort crystallises into something more specific – a particular tension, a particular competing value, a particular risk.
It asks questions you haven’t asked yourself. A supervisor who asks “whose interests are you prioritising here?” or “what would you want if you were the client?” or “what are you most afraid of in this situation?” can open up the thinking in ways that working alone doesn’t.
It draws on wider experience and knowledge. Your supervisor has likely encountered similar situations – or situations that illuminate yours from an unexpected angle. That accumulated experience is a resource you’re drawing on every time you bring an ethical question to supervision.
It creates an audit trail. If you’ve thought through an ethical dilemma carefully in supervision, documented the discussion, and made a reasoned decision, you can explain your reasoning if it’s ever questioned. That defensibility matters – not because you’re expecting to be challenged, but because clear ethical thinking protects both you and your clients.
The most common ethical dilemmas in counselling
It’s worth naming some of the most frequent areas where ethical dilemmas arise – because they’re often more complex than they first appear.
Confidentiality and its limits – this is the territory most therapists know best in theory but find most difficult in practice. When does a client’s right to confidentiality yield to a concern about their safety or someone else’s? The principle is clear. The application to a specific situation rarely is. The risk of harm needs to be serious, imminent, and not manageable within the therapeutic relationship. What counts as serious? What counts as imminent? These judgements require careful thought – ideally with your supervisor.
Dual relationships – situations where you have or develop a relationship with a client outside the therapeutic frame. These aren’t always avoidable, particularly in small communities or specialist fields. The question is how to manage them – whether the therapeutic relationship can continue, what safeguards are needed, and whether the client’s interests are genuinely protected.
Working at the edge of competence – knowing when a client’s needs have exceeded what you can offer and a referral is needed. This is ethically significant because the pull to continue – out of attachment to the client, reluctance to disrupt continuity, or uncertainty about what’s available – can work against the client’s interests. Growing as a therapist through supervision involves developing the judgement to recognise these edges clearly rather than unconsciously extending beyond them.
Fitness to practise – your own and others’. If you’re going through something personally that’s affecting your capacity to be present with clients, that has ethical implications. If you’re aware of a colleague working in ways that are causing harm, that has ethical implications too. Neither is comfortable to raise. Both matter.
Safeguarding – the obligation to act when a client or someone connected to them is at risk. This is one of the clearest examples of where the practitioner’s ethical obligations may override the client’s wishes – and the decision to act, how to act, and how to manage the impact on the therapeutic relationship all deserve careful thought in supervision.
What gets in the way of bringing ethical dilemmas to supervision
There are a few patterns worth noticing.
Some therapists bring ethical dilemmas to supervision only after they’ve already made a decision. They’re not really seeking to think it through – they’re seeking confirmation that they got it right. That’s understandable but it misses the point. The thinking is most valuable before the decision, not after it.
Some therapists are reluctant to bring ethical concerns because they worry about how they’ll be perceived. They’re afraid that raising a dilemma will signal incompetence – that a better therapist would have known what to do.
That’s the wrong way to think about it. Bringing an ethical dilemma to supervision is a mark of good practice, not a confession of failure. The therapists who should worry are the ones who never have ethical questions – because that probably means they’re not looking carefully enough at their work.
Some therapists try to resolve ethical dilemmas using only the framework – applying the rules without fully engaging with the human complexity of the situation. That’s not ethical thinking. It’s rule-following. Ethical thinking requires more than that.
Supervision plays a crucial role in upholding ethical standards in counselling, offering a space for reflection and guidance.
That reflection is what distinguishes ethical practice from mere compliance.
Ethical dilemmas and client protection
It’s worth stepping back and naming what ethical thinking in supervision is ultimately in service of.
It’s not about protecting the therapist from complaints, though good ethical practice does that too. It’s not about demonstrating compliance with professional body requirements, though that matters too.
It’s about the people you’re sitting with. The clients who have trusted you with something significant about their lives. Clinical supervision in counselling exists primarily as a safeguard for them – and nowhere is that more true than in the ethical domain.
When you think carefully about a difficult ethical situation in supervision, you’re protecting your client. You’re making sure that the decision you make genuinely serves their interests, takes their autonomy seriously, and doesn’t substitute your anxiety or your convenience for a proper weighing of what they need.
That’s what ethical practice looks like in action. Not rules applied mechanically. Genuine thinking, in relationship with someone who can help you see more clearly.
I offer individual supervision online across the UK and internationally, and in person in Tenterden, Kent. Supervision that takes your ethical thinking seriously – including the difficult questions. I offer a free 15 minute call with no obligation.
Book a free 15 minute call here
Gareth Taylor is a Professional Accredited Member of the NCPS (PNCPS Acc.) and a qualified counselling supervisor. He offers individual supervision online across the UK and internationally, and in person in Tenterden, Kent.
