CAADC Exam Free Practice Questions

Minnesota Statute 626.556 mandates that certain professionals, including alcohol and drug counselors, are considered mandated reporters. This means they are legally obligated to report suspected child abuse or neglect to the appropriate authorities. The law specifies that the report must be made immediately upon suspicion, and failure to report can result in criminal penalties. The statute provides immunity from civil or criminal liability for reporters acting in good faith. The report should include the name and address of the child, the parents or caregivers, the nature of the suspected abuse or neglect, and any other information that might be helpful in the investigation. Counselors should be familiar with the specific reporting procedures in their county and have a clear understanding of what constitutes reasonable suspicion.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) governs the privacy and security of protected health information (PHI). While HIPAA sets a national standard, state laws can provide additional protections. In Minnesota, laws related to substance use disorder treatment records, found in statutes like 148F and 254A, often provide stricter confidentiality protections than HIPAA alone. For example, certain substance use disorder treatment records may require a specific court order for disclosure, even if HIPAA would allow disclosure under certain circumstances. Therefore, LADCs in Minnesota must be aware of both federal HIPAA regulations and any stricter state laws that provide additional confidentiality protections. When state law is more stringent, the LADC must adhere to the stricter state law to protect client confidentiality.

Comprehensive assessment in substance use treatment involves gathering information from multiple sources, including client interviews, standardized assessment instruments, and collateral contacts (with the client’s consent). Screening tools, such as the AUDIT (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test) and DAST (Drug Abuse Screening Test), can help identify individuals who may have a substance use disorder. Diagnostic interviewing skills are essential for obtaining a detailed history of the client’s substance use, mental health, and social functioning. Risk assessment is crucial for identifying potential safety concerns, such as suicidal ideation or risk of violence. Cultural considerations are important to ensure that the assessment process is culturally sensitive and appropriate for the client’s background. The assessment results inform the development of an individualized treatment plan that addresses the client’s specific needs and goals. Proper documentation and record-keeping are essential for ethical and legal compliance.

Minnesota statutes and rules related to telehealth for mental health professionals, including LADCs, emphasize the importance of informed consent, confidentiality, and competence. LADCs providing telehealth services must obtain informed consent from clients, ensuring they understand the nature of telehealth, potential risks and benefits, and their right to refuse or withdraw from treatment. They must also maintain confidentiality by using secure platforms and adhering to HIPAA regulations. Furthermore, LADCs must be competent in the use of telehealth technologies and adapt their counseling skills to the virtual environment. It’s crucial to verify the client’s location and address any potential barriers to access or safety concerns.

Minnesota Statute 148F.11 outlines specific exceptions to client data privacy. A crucial exception, directly relevant to the duty to warn, involves situations where a client has communicated a specific and serious threat of physical violence against a clearly identified or identifiable potential victim, and the client has the apparent intent and ability to carry out that threat. In such instances, the licensed professional has a duty to take reasonable steps to protect the intended victim. These steps may include, but are not limited to, notifying the potential victim, notifying law enforcement, or initiating proceedings for civil commitment. The standard of care requires that the counselor exercise reasonable professional judgment, documenting the assessment of the threat and the actions taken. The counselor’s actions must be proportionate to the assessed risk. Failing to act when such a threat is evident could expose the counselor to legal liability and ethical sanctions, while acting without reasonable cause could also result in negative consequences. It is essential for LADC professionals to be thoroughly familiar with the specific wording and interpretation of Minnesota Statute 148F.11 and related case law to ensure they are acting ethically and legally when faced with a duty-to-warn situation. This involves a complex assessment of credibility, intent, and the capacity to act on the threat, all while balancing client confidentiality with public safety.

Minnesota Statutes Chapter 148G governs the practice of alcohol and drug counseling. Specifically, 148G.06 addresses the scope of practice for Licensed Alcohol and Drug Counselors (LADCs). This statute defines the services that LADCs are legally authorized to provide, including assessment, diagnosis, treatment planning, individual and group counseling, and relapse prevention services related to substance use disorders. The statute also outlines the limitations of the LADC’s scope of practice, emphasizing that LADCs must practice within their area of competence and are not authorized to provide services that fall under the scope of practice of other licensed professionals, such as psychologists or psychiatrists, unless appropriately trained and supervised. Understanding the scope of practice is crucial for LADCs to ensure they are providing ethical and legal services.

According to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 148F.020, subd. 3, a licensed alcohol and drug counselor (LADC) must adhere to specific guidelines regarding client confidentiality. This statute underscores the importance of protecting client information, but also outlines exceptions where disclosure is mandated or permitted. Specifically, an LADC is required to report suspected child abuse or neglect, as mandated by Minnesota’s mandatory reporting laws (Minnesota Statutes Chapter 626.556). Additionally, the duty to warn and protect, as informed by the Tarasoff ruling and subsequent interpretations in Minnesota law, requires an LADC to take reasonable steps to protect a third party if a client poses a credible threat of serious harm. While client consent is generally required for disclosure of information, exceptions exist in cases of medical emergencies, legal requirements, or when necessary to prevent imminent harm to the client or others. Disclosing client information solely for the purpose of receiving clinical supervision, without explicit client consent or a legal mandate, would be a violation of confidentiality unless the information is de-identified. The counselor must always prioritize the client’s safety and well-being, while adhering to legal and ethical obligations.

Minnesota Statute 148F.02 outlines the specific requirements for client records, including the duration they must be retained. Generally, records must be kept for at least seven years from the date of the last professional service provided. However, for clients who are minors, the retention period extends until one year after the client reaches the age of eighteen, or seven years from the date of the last service, whichever is longer. This ensures that records are available for potential future needs, such as legal proceedings, continuity of care, or client requests. Failing to comply with these record-keeping requirements can result in disciplinary action by the licensing board. Furthermore, proper documentation is crucial for ethical practice, allowing for accurate recall of client history, treatment plans, and progress. Maintaining detailed and organized records demonstrates professionalism and accountability, protecting both the client and the counselor. It is also vital to consider HIPAA regulations alongside state laws to ensure comprehensive compliance regarding privacy and security of client information. The interplay between state and federal guidelines necessitates a thorough understanding of all applicable regulations to avoid potential legal and ethical violations.

The duty to warn and protect, stemming from the Tarasoff case, applies when a client poses a serious and imminent threat to an identifiable victim. In Minnesota, this duty is codified in law and professional ethical guidelines. It requires the counselor to take reasonable steps to protect the intended victim, which may include notifying the victim, notifying law enforcement, or taking other actions to prevent harm. Simply documenting the threat in the client’s record is insufficient; active intervention is required. The threat must be specific and credible, not just a vague or generalized statement. The counselor’s primary responsibility is to protect potential victims from harm, even if it means breaching client confidentiality.

Minnesota Rule 4757.7000 governs professional boundaries and dual relationships for licensed alcohol and drug counselors. This rule prohibits LADCs from engaging in dual relationships with clients that could impair their objectivity, competence, or effectiveness, or risk exploitation or harm to the client. Dual relationships can include, but are not limited to, business relationships, close personal friendships, or sexual relationships. The rule recognizes that some dual relationships are unavoidable, particularly in small communities, and provides guidance on how to manage such situations ethically. In unavoidable dual relationships, the LADC must take steps to minimize the risk of harm to the client, such as obtaining informed consent, seeking supervision, and documenting the steps taken to protect the client. The rule also addresses the issue of relationships with former clients, stating that LADCs should not engage in sexual relationships with former clients for at least two years after the termination of services. Even after two years, LADCs must carefully consider the potential for exploitation or harm to the former client before entering into a relationship. Furthermore, the rule prohibits LADCs from accepting gifts from clients that are of significant value or that could be interpreted as a form of exploitation.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Privacy Rule establishes national standards for protecting the privacy of individually identifiable health information. In the context of substance use disorder treatment, 42 CFR Part 2 provides additional protections for patient records related to substance use treatment. 42 CFR Part 2 is stricter than HIPAA in certain aspects, particularly regarding disclosure of information. While HIPAA allows for certain disclosures for treatment, payment, and healthcare operations, 42 CFR Part 2 generally requires specific written consent from the patient for any disclosure of their substance use treatment records, even for these purposes. This heightened protection aims to encourage individuals to seek substance use treatment without fear of their information being disclosed without their explicit consent. The regulations also address redisclosure, meaning that entities receiving information under 42 CFR Part 2 are generally prohibited from further disclosing it without the patient’s consent.

Minnesota Statute 148F.11 outlines the requirements for client records maintenance, security, and access, emphasizing the counselor’s responsibility to protect client confidentiality. The statute mandates secure storage, controlled access, and adherence to HIPAA regulations where applicable. Subd. 1 addresses record content, Subd. 2 addresses record retention, Subd. 3 addresses record access, and Subd. 4 addresses record disposal. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in disciplinary action by the Board of Behavioral Health and Therapy. A scenario where a counselor uses a non-encrypted personal device to store client session notes directly violates the security provisions, regardless of whether the device is password-protected. Password protection alone does not meet the standard for secure storage required by the statute and professional ethical guidelines. Proper storage involves encrypted systems and adherence to protocols that prevent unauthorized access, data breaches, or loss of confidential information. The counselor’s responsibility extends to ensuring that all electronic and physical records are maintained in a manner that protects client privacy and complies with legal and ethical standards. Using a non-encrypted device introduces unacceptable risks, including potential exposure of sensitive client data in the event of device loss, theft, or unauthorized access.

Minnesota Statute 148F.11 outlines the requirements for client access to their records. It mandates that clients have the right to access their records, but it also allows for limitations in specific circumstances. Subd. 2(a) specifically addresses situations where the counselor believes the information could be detrimental to the client’s physical or mental health. In such cases, the counselor can provide a summary of the record instead of direct access, or even deny access altogether, but this denial must be documented with a detailed reason. It is crucial to understand that while clients have a right to access, this right is not absolute and can be carefully managed under specific conditions to protect the client’s well-being. The LADC needs to balance the client’s autonomy with their duty to do no harm, consulting with supervisors or peers when necessary. Failing to adhere to these guidelines could lead to ethical violations and legal repercussions.

Minnesota Statute 148F.11 outlines specific exceptions to client confidentiality for Licensed Alcohol and Drug Counselors (LADCs). A critical exception involves situations where a client presents an imminent risk of harm to themselves or others. In such cases, the LADC has a duty to warn and protect, which overrides the general principle of confidentiality. This duty is not absolute and requires the LADC to exercise professional judgment, considering the severity and immediacy of the threat, the identifiability of the potential victim(s), and the client’s access to means of harm. The LADC must make reasonable efforts to avert the harm, which may include notifying the potential victim(s), contacting law enforcement, or initiating civil commitment proceedings under Minnesota Statute 253B.05. The LADC’s actions should be documented thoroughly, including the rationale for the decision, the steps taken to protect potential victims, and any consultations with supervisors or legal counsel. Failure to adhere to these guidelines can result in legal and ethical repercussions. The LADC must balance the client’s right to confidentiality with the overriding duty to protect human life and safety, adhering to the ethical principles of beneficence and non-maleficence. The complexity arises in assessing the credibility and immediacy of the threat, requiring careful evaluation of the client’s statements, behavior, and history. Consultation with experienced colleagues or legal counsel is advisable in ambiguous or high-stakes situations.

Motivational Interviewing (MI) is an evidence-based counseling approach that focuses on enhancing a client’s intrinsic motivation to change. A core principle of MI is to avoid confrontation and instead work collaboratively with the client to explore their ambivalence about change. This involves using techniques such as reflective listening, asking open-ended questions, affirming the client’s strengths, and summarizing their perspectives. The “righting reflex,” which is the counselor’s urge to fix the client’s problems or tell them what to do, is counterproductive in MI. Instead, the counselor aims to evoke the client’s own reasons for change and support their autonomy in making decisions. MI is particularly effective in addressing substance use disorders because it acknowledges the client’s ambivalence and helps them move through the stages of change. The spirit of MI emphasizes collaboration, acceptance, compassion, and evocation. Understanding and applying these principles is essential for LADCs working with clients who are hesitant or resistant to change.

Minnesota Statutes, specifically Chapter 148D, governs the practice of alcohol and drug counseling. Within this chapter, the scope of practice for Licensed Alcohol and Drug Counselors (LADCs) is defined. This definition typically includes assessment, evaluation, treatment planning, counseling, case management, and relapse prevention services related to substance use disorders. However, the scope of practice is limited to areas in which the LADC has received appropriate education, training, and supervised experience. An LADC’s scope of practice does NOT generally include prescribing medication, providing medical diagnoses unrelated to substance use, or engaging in practices that are outside the realm of alcohol and drug counseling. For instance, an LADC should not provide psychotherapy for primary mental health disorders unless they are also licensed as a mental health professional. In the scenario presented, the LADC is being asked to provide career counseling services to a client. While career counseling may be a helpful service for individuals in recovery, it is not typically considered to be within the scope of practice of an LADC. The LADC should refer the client to a qualified career counselor who has the appropriate training and expertise to provide these services.

Minnesota Statute 148F.11 outlines specific conditions under which a licensed alcohol and drug counselor (LADC) *must* report suspected maltreatment of vulnerable adults. The statute emphasizes the LADC’s role as a mandated reporter when there is reasonable cause to believe a vulnerable adult is being or has been subjected to maltreatment. This duty supersedes general confidentiality obligations. The “reasonable cause” threshold is lower than “absolute certainty,” acknowledging the counselor’s role is to report suspicions, not to conduct investigations. Failure to report under these circumstances can result in legal and ethical repercussions for the LADC. The LADC is expected to act in the best interest of the vulnerable adult, prioritizing their safety and well-being above all else. The statute also provides immunity from liability for good-faith reporting. It is important to understand that the statute does not require reporting based solely on a client’s *admission* of past maltreatment of a vulnerable adult, unless there is reasonable cause to believe the maltreatment is ongoing or likely to occur.

Minnesota Statute 148F.11 outlines specific circumstances under which a licensed alcohol and drug counselor (LADC) is mandated to report suspected maltreatment of vulnerable adults. This duty to report is triggered when the LADC, in their professional capacity, has knowledge of or reasonable cause to believe that a vulnerable adult is being or has been maltreated. “Maltreatment” encompasses abuse, neglect, or financial exploitation. The statute emphasizes that the report must be made immediately to the Common Entry Point (CEP), which serves as the central intake for reports of maltreatment. “Immediately” is interpreted as within 24 hours of the LADC forming the belief that maltreatment has occurred. Failure to report suspected maltreatment can result in penalties, including fines and disciplinary action against the LADC’s license. The LADC is also granted immunity from civil or criminal liability for making a good faith report, even if the report is later determined to be unfounded. The law prioritizes the safety and well-being of vulnerable adults, placing a legal and ethical responsibility on LADCs to act promptly when maltreatment is suspected. This includes reporting situations where the vulnerable adult is unable to report for themselves due to cognitive or physical limitations. The LADC must document the basis for their suspicion and the steps taken to report the maltreatment.

Minnesota Statute 148F.11, subd. 1, mandates reporting of suspected child abuse or neglect. The scenario describes a situation where a client, while seeking help for substance use, discloses past abuse of their child. The LADC’s primary ethical and legal obligation is to protect the child. This overrides confidentiality concerns. Consulting with a supervisor is a good practice, but it doesn’t fulfill the immediate legal requirement. Confronting the client might jeopardize the child’s safety or the investigation. While gathering more information is important, the LADC already has reasonable cause to suspect abuse, triggering the mandatory reporting requirement. Failure to report could result in legal penalties for the LADC. The duty to report is triggered when there is reasonable cause to believe a child is being abused or neglected, not absolute certainty. The report must be made to the appropriate authorities, typically child protective services or law enforcement. Understanding the specific reporting procedures in Minnesota is crucial for all LADCs.

The duty to warn and protect, stemming from the Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California case, requires mental health professionals to take reasonable steps to protect individuals who are at imminent risk of harm from their clients. This duty arises when a therapist determines, or should have determined, that a client presents a serious danger of violence to a specific individual or identifiable group of individuals. The therapist must then take reasonable steps to protect the intended victim, which may include warning the victim, notifying law enforcement, or taking other appropriate actions. The specific requirements of the duty to warn and protect vary by state. In Minnesota, the duty to warn and protect is codified in statute and case law. The therapist’s decision to warn or protect must be based on a reasonable assessment of the client’s dangerousness and the imminence of the threat. The therapist is not required to guarantee the safety of the intended victim, but rather to take reasonable steps to prevent harm.

Minnesota’s telehealth regulations, aligned with broader national trends, emphasize the importance of informed consent in telehealth services. Before initiating telehealth sessions, the LADC must provide the client with comprehensive information about the nature of telehealth, including potential benefits and risks, limitations of technology, emergency protocols, data privacy and security measures, and alternative options for in-person services. The client must have the opportunity to ask questions and make an informed decision about whether to participate in telehealth. This consent should be documented in the client’s record. Simply informing the client that telehealth is an option is insufficient; the LADC must ensure the client fully understands the implications of receiving services remotely.

Minnesota Statute 148F.11 outlines specific requirements for client records maintained by alcohol and drug counselors. This statute emphasizes the importance of accurate, current, and pertinent documentation of services provided. It requires counselors to maintain records in a manner that protects client confidentiality, adhering to both state and federal regulations, including HIPAA. The statute also details the length of time records must be retained (generally seven years after the client’s last date of service for adults and until three years after a minor reaches the age of 18, but not less than seven years), and the conditions under which records can be released or disclosed, such as with client consent or under legal compulsion. Furthermore, the statute addresses the counselor’s responsibility to ensure the security and integrity of records, whether they are stored electronically or in paper format. A key aspect of this is the documentation of treatment plans, progress notes, assessments, and any consultations or referrals made on behalf of the client. Counselors must also document any unusual incidents or critical events that occur during treatment, along with the actions taken in response. The statute also considers the client’s right to access their records and to request amendments if they believe the information is inaccurate or incomplete. Failure to comply with these record-keeping requirements can result in disciplinary action by the licensing board.

Minnesota Rules Governing the Practice of Alcohol and Drug Counseling, specifically Chapter 4747, addresses ethical conduct and professional standards for LADCs. Rule 4747.0120 outlines prohibited dual relationships, emphasizing that counselors must avoid relationships with clients that could impair their objectivity, compromise the therapeutic relationship, or exploit the client. Rule 4747.0130 addresses confidentiality, detailing the counselor’s duty to protect client information and the exceptions to confidentiality, such as mandatory reporting requirements. Rule 4747.0140 covers informed consent, requiring counselors to provide clients with information about the nature of the counseling process, fees, confidentiality policies, and their rights. Rule 4747.0150 addresses advertising and representations, prohibiting false or misleading statements about the counselor’s qualifications or services. Rule 4747.0160 covers termination of services, requiring counselors to terminate services when they are no longer beneficial to the client and to make appropriate referrals.

Minnesota Statute 148F.11 outlines specific requirements for client records, including content, retention, and confidentiality. Subd. 2(a) details the information that must be included in a client’s record, such as identifying information, dates of service, types of services, treatment plans, assessments, and progress notes. Subd. 3(a) mandates that client records must be retained for at least seven years after the client’s last date of service. Furthermore, 148F.11 Subd. 1 emphasizes the confidentiality of client records, permitting disclosure only with valid consent or as mandated by law. The scenario involves a subpoena, which necessitates understanding the legal obligations concerning privileged communication. Minnesota Statute 595.02, subd. 1(j) specifically addresses the privilege between a licensed alcohol and drug counselor and their client, indicating that such communications are generally privileged and cannot be disclosed without the client’s consent, unless an exception applies. The statute also provides guidance on how to respond to a subpoena when privileged information is requested, requiring the counselor to assert the privilege and potentially seek guidance from the court. Therefore, the counselor must assert privilege and contact the client to obtain consent for release of records.

Professional boundaries are crucial for maintaining the integrity of the therapeutic relationship and protecting clients from harm. Dual relationships occur when a counselor has a relationship with a client outside of the professional counseling context. These relationships can be problematic because they can blur the lines between the counselor’s and client’s roles, create conflicts of interest, and exploit the power imbalance inherent in the therapeutic relationship. Examples of dual relationships include engaging in business ventures with clients, becoming friends with clients on social media, providing counseling services to family members or close friends, or engaging in sexual or romantic relationships with former clients. Minnesota Rules 4747.0900 addresses ethical standards including avoiding dual relationships that could impair objectivity or increase the risk of client exploitation. While some dual relationships may be unavoidable or unintentional, counselors have a responsibility to minimize the risks associated with them. This may involve avoiding certain types of relationships altogether, seeking supervision or consultation when dual relationships are unavoidable, and taking steps to protect the client’s best interests. In general, counselors should avoid any dual relationship that could compromise their objectivity, impair their judgment, or exploit the client’s vulnerability.

The DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition) provides specific criteria for diagnosing substance use disorders. These criteria are organized into categories such as impaired control, social impairment, risky use, and pharmacological criteria (tolerance and withdrawal). The diagnosis is based on the number of criteria met, which determines the severity of the disorder (mild, moderate, or severe). It’s crucial for LADCs to understand and apply these criteria accurately to ensure appropriate diagnosis and treatment planning. The DSM-5 also emphasizes the importance of considering cultural and contextual factors when making a diagnosis.

Minnesota Statute 148F.03, subd. 1(b) defines the scope of practice for Licensed Alcohol and Drug Counselors (LADCs). This statute specifies the activities that LADCs are legally authorized to perform, including assessment, diagnosis, treatment planning, individual and group counseling, and relapse prevention services related to substance use disorders. It also outlines the limitations of their practice, emphasizing that LADCs must work within their area of competence and seek supervision when necessary. The statute prohibits LADCs from engaging in activities that fall outside their scope of practice, such as prescribing medication or providing medical diagnoses. Understanding the scope of practice is crucial for LADCs to ensure they are providing ethical and legal services to their clients. Violations of the scope of practice can result in disciplinary action by the Board of Behavioral Health and Therapy. The statute aims to protect the public by ensuring that LADCs are qualified and competent to provide substance use disorder treatment services.

Minnesota Statute 148F.05 addresses confidentiality and data privacy specifically for alcohol and drug counselors. It emphasizes the importance of protecting client information and outlines the circumstances under which disclosure is permitted. While client consent is generally required for disclosure, there are exceptions for mandatory reporting situations, such as suspected child abuse or neglect, as mandated by Minnesota Statute 626.556. In such cases, the LADC has a legal obligation to report the information to the appropriate authorities, even without client consent. Failing to report suspected child abuse or neglect can result in legal penalties for the LADC. The duty to report supersedes the client’s right to confidentiality in these specific situations. However, the LADC should still inform the client of the reporting requirement whenever possible, while ensuring the safety of the child.

Minnesota Statute 148F.02 outlines specific exceptions to client confidentiality for Licensed Alcohol and Drug Counselors (LADCs). One crucial exception involves situations where the client poses an imminent risk of harm to themselves or others. In such cases, the LADC has a duty to warn and protect potential victims, which overrides the general principle of confidentiality. This duty is further clarified by legal precedents, such as the Tarasoff ruling, which originated in California but has influenced similar legal interpretations across the United States, including Minnesota. The LADC must assess the credibility and immediacy of the threat, identify potential victims, and take reasonable steps to prevent harm. These steps may include notifying law enforcement, warning the intended victim, or initiating involuntary commitment proceedings. Failure to act appropriately in such situations could expose the LADC to legal liability and ethical sanctions. The Minnesota Board of Behavioral Health and Therapy provides guidelines and interpretations of these statutes to assist LADCs in navigating complex ethical dilemmas related to confidentiality and duty to warn. Furthermore, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) allows for disclosures necessary to prevent serious and imminent threats to health or safety. Therefore, the LADC’s actions must be carefully documented, demonstrating a thorough assessment of the risk and the steps taken to mitigate it, while adhering to both state and federal regulations.

Minnesota Statute 148F.11 outlines specific exceptions to client confidentiality, including situations where there is a reasonable belief that the client poses an imminent risk of harm to themselves or others. The “duty to warn and protect,” stemming from the landmark Tarasoff case and codified in Minnesota law, necessitates that a therapist take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm. These steps may include notifying potential victims, contacting law enforcement, or initiating commitment proceedings. The determination of “imminent risk” involves a careful assessment of the client’s statements, behavior, and history, considering factors such as the specificity of the threat, the client’s access to means, and the identifiability of the potential victim. Simply having suicidal ideation without a concrete plan does not automatically trigger the duty to warn, but a detailed plan, readily available means, and a clear intent would. Similarly, vague threats against a non-identifiable group would likely not meet the threshold for the duty to warn. The LADC must also consider the client’s right to privacy and the potential impact of breaching confidentiality on the therapeutic relationship. Consultation with a supervisor or legal counsel is advisable in complex cases to ensure ethical and legal compliance. In this case, the client has a specific plan to harm a specific person, and the counselor is obligated to act to protect the intended victim.