Consider This
Question 1: After being threatened by Deborah, Sylvia used empathic inquiry to get her to consider alternative actions. Do you agree or disagree with how Sylvia handled this?
This was a judgment call by Sylvia based on their six month long relationship that had been a trusting one up until the threat. It is also important to recognize that the threat was not immediate but rather based on events that had not yet occurred. An abrupt, untimely and abnormal departure by Sylvia could have triggered a violent response in Deborah. Sylvia's objectives were to remain calm, maintain trust with Deborah and then get out as quickly as possible.
Question 2: Sylvia felt it was her duty to warn the social worker about Deborah's threat. Do you agree or disagree?
In clinical psychological practice in the United States, duty to warn requires a clinician who has reasonable grounds to believe that a client may be in imminent danger of harming himself or others to warn the possible victims. Depending upon the jurisdiction, there may be legal consequences for not reporting such threats. Morally, Sylvia had to weigh her fear of Deborah's reprisals against the potential guilt if Deborah followed through on her threats against the social worker.
Question 3: How might this counseling session have been helpful to Sylvia?
Everyone responds differently to trauma. One goal of crisis intervention is to help those being counseled to recognize that they're having normal reactions to unusual events.