This week, you explored different types of multiple relationships. Some multiple relationships are unavoidable and unanticipated, such as human services prof

HSV400 – Ethical and Legal Issues in Human Services Unit 6 Assignment: Multiple Relationships Due Date: Points: 100 Overview: This week, you explored different types of multiple relationships. Some multiple relationships are unavoidable and unanticipated, such as human services professionals working in a rural community might have a neighbor as a client. However, other multiple relationships, such as developing a romantic relationship with a client should never happen. Instructions: In a 2-3 page paper, you will address the following:

• Create an original multiple relationship case scenario. Your case scenario must be at least one full paragraph (5-7 sentences). The case scenario you create will be used for the rest of this assignment. Be sure to provide as many details as necessary, and the case scenario you create should be realistic.

o Identify the multiple relationship. o Explain the ethical challenges of this multiple relationship. o Discuss any legal considerations of this multiple relationship. o Explain if the multiple relationship involves a boundary crossing or boundary

violation. o Detail the risk management strategies you would use for this multiple

relationship. o Lastly, reflect on the benefits and risks of engaging in a multiple relationship with

the client.

Requirements:

• 2-3 page paper written in APA format, not including title and reference pages. • 2 scholarly resources, one of which must be the ACA Code of Ethics or the

NOHS Standards). • A title and reference page are required and not included in the page count.

HSV400–Ethical and Legal Issuesin Human Services Unit6Assignment:Multiple Relationships

Be sure to read the criteria below by which your work will be evaluated before you write and again after you write.

Evaluation Rubric for Unit 6 Assignment

CRITERIA Deficient Needs Improvement

Proficient Exemplary

0 – 11 points 12– 15 points 16– 19 points 20 points Originality and Realism of Scenario

Scenario is generic, lacks originality or realism, and does not clearly identify the multiple relationship.

Scenario meets basic requirements for originality and realism but lacks depth or detail in context.

Scenario is original and sufficiently detailed, identifying the multiple relationship with adequate context.

Scenario is highly original, detailed, and realistic, clearly identifying the multiple relationship with rich context that enhances understanding.

Ethical Analysis Analysis is minimal, incorrect, or missing significant ethical considerations.

Ethical analysis is basic, covering essential points but lacking depth or insight.

Ethical challenges are well-explained, but the analysis could be deeper or more nuanced.

Provides a comprehensive and insightful analysis of the ethical challenges, demonstrating deep understanding of ethical principles in human services.

0 – 5 points 6 – 7 points 8 – 9 points 10 points Legal Considerations

Fails to address legal considerations or makes significant errors in connection to the scenario.

Mentions legal considerations but lacks detail or fails to connect these clearly to the scenario.

Adequately discusses legal considerations but may lack detail or specific connection to the scenario.

Thoroughly discusses relevant legal considerations with precision, showing a strong connection to the specific scenario and broader legal frameworks.

Boundary Analysis

Does not adequately differentiate between boundary crossing and violation or is irrelevant to the scenario.

Provides a basic differentiation with limited explanation.

Differentiates between boundary crossing and violation but lacks nuanced explanation or specific relevance to the scenario.

Excellently differentiates between boundary crossing and violation in context, providing a nuanced explanation relevant to the scenario.

CRITERIA Deficient Needs Improvement

Proficient Exemplary

0 – 8 points 9– 11 points 12– 14 points 15 points Risk Management Strategies

Risk management strategies are poorly defined, unrealistic, or missing.

Strategies are mentioned but are generic or not fully appropriate to the scenario.

Proposes realistic risk management strategies but lacks some detail or specificity to the scenario.

Outlines detailed, realistic, and appropriate risk management strategies specifically tailored to the scenario, showing a proactive and thoughtful approach.

Reflection on Relationships

Minimal or no reflection on the benefits and risks or is significantly biased or uninformed.

Reflection covers basic benefits and risks but lacks depth or critical analysis.

Provides a good reflection on benefits and risks but may be biased or less critical.

Reflects deeply on the benefits and risks of the multiple relationship with a balanced perspective, showing critical thinking and professional insight.

0 – 5 points 6 – 7 points 8 – 9 points 10 points APA Format and Referencing

Fails to meet APA formatting standards or source requirements; significant errors in citation.

APA formatting has noticeable errors; includes the minimum required sources but may have citation errors.

Properly formatted in APA style with minor errors. Includes at least the required two sources, cited correctly.

Impeccably formatted according to APA guidelines with no errors. Includes at least two resources, and all are cited perfectly.