| Course | PS526 Advanced Addictions Counseling |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 4 |
| Paper type | Discussion board post |
| Length | About 420 words, 2 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 discussion post |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | MS in Psychology |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for PS526 Unit 4
The Only Saturday Meeting in Town: A PS526 Unit 4 Discussion Board Post on a Counselor in Recovery Meeting a Client at AA
PS526 · Unit 4 Discussion Board Post
Posted by [Student Name]
The writer, the treatment center, the client and the classmates are composite; the sources cited are real.
Initial Post
My supervisor at our residential center has been sober for twelve years and has gone to the same Saturday 7:00 a.m. AA meeting in Spearfish for most of them. Two weeks after Curtis, the mechanic from my earlier posts, was discharged, he walked into that meeting. My supervisor told me about it at our next supervision and asked me what I would have done. We spent an hour on it.
The NAADAC code asks addiction professionals to avoid dual relationships that could impair their judgment or risk exploiting a client, while recognizing that some overlapping roles cannot be avoided (NAADAC, 2021). A twelve-step meeting is a peer setting, where members share personal struggles as equals. A counselor who shares there about a hard week, in front of a former client, is no longer in a purely professional role.
Reamer (2021) distinguishes boundary crossings, which depart from strict roles without harming the client, from boundary violations, which exploit or harm. Attending the same meeting is not a violation in itself. The risk lies in what follows: whether the client feels watched, whether the counselor censors their own recovery or whether the counselor becomes a sponsor-like figure outside the professional relationship.
The question was not whether my supervisor had done anything wrong by attending, but how to keep a meeting that saves one person's sobriety from crowding another's.
My supervisor's choice was to speak briefly with Curtis after the meeting, acknowledge the awkwardness and ask what he preferred. Curtis said he wanted to keep coming because it was the only meeting that fit his work schedule. My supervisor decided to switch to a Saturday meeting in Belle Fourche, twenty minutes away, for the next six months, and documented the decision.
How would you handle the same meeting if no other option existed?
Reply to Teresa
Teresa, your idea of agreeing not to share personal details when the client is present is one option. Reamer (2021) would ask whether that changes what the meeting offers the counselor.
Reply to Gabe
Gabe, I agree that documenting the decision protects both people. The NAADAC code's emphasis on managing unavoidable overlaps supports writing it down (NAADAC, 2021).
References
NAADAC. (2021). NAADAC code of ethics. NAADAC, the Association for Addiction Professionals. https://www.naadac.org/code-of-ethics
Reamer, F. G. (2021). Boundary issues and dual relationships in the human services (3rd ed.). Columbia University Press.
Reading the PS 526 Unit 4 instructions
For the fourth-unit board, analyze an ethical dilemma in the counselor and client relationship. Describe the situation and the people involved, keeping identities composite. Identify the ethical issue precisely and name the NAADAC code standards that apply. Use a scholarly framework, such as the distinction between boundary crossings and violations, to judge the level of risk. Describe the options available, the choice that was made and how it was documented. Consider what the counselor gives up under each option, not only what the client gains. Close with a harder version of the dilemma for classmates to reason through, and in two replies offer another option or a risk the classmate's analysis did not weigh.
How this PS526 Unit 4 example is built
The post opens with the supervisor's twelve years at the same meeting and the client's arrival two weeks after discharge. A paragraph names the NAADAC standards on dual relationships and explains why a peer meeting blurs roles. A paragraph uses Reamer to classify the overlap as a crossing and to locate its risks. A highlighted line reframes the question around two people's sobriety. A paragraph reports the supervisor's brief conversation, the client's preference, the switch to a Belle Fourche meeting and the documentation. A closing question asks what to do if no other meeting existed, followed by replies on limiting personal sharing and on documentation.
Reading the PS526 Unit 4 grading rubric
Instructors credit posts that state the ethical issue precisely and tie it to specific NAADAC standards rather than to ethics in general. Using a recognized framework to judge risk, instead of declaring the situation simply allowed or forbidden, shows mature reasoning. The strongest posts weigh options for both the client and the counselor, including what the counselor's own recovery requires. Documentation of the decision shows professional practice. Replies earn credit by offering another option or a risk the classmate did not consider. Composite details, a respectful tone and APA citations of the code and the framework are expected, and the post should meet the schedule and length set in the prompt.
PS526 Unit 4 help from the desk
Weak posts on this dilemma either insist the counselor must stop attending AA altogether, ignoring the counselor's own recovery, or say there is no issue because AA is anonymous. Another common gap is skipping what the client wants, though asking the client is often the most useful step. Some posts cite the code without naming the standard. Others forget documentation. Before posting, check that you name the specific standard, classify the overlap as a crossing or violation with reasons, list at least two options with what each costs the counselor and the client and state how the decision was recorded. A one-line note in the supervision log is enough, but it has to exist.
Get a PS526 Unit 4 example written to your instructions
Share the dilemma and the rubric. A custom post analyzes one counselor and client dilemma under the code. It is free the first time and back in 24-48h. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More PS526 papers and MS in Psychology samples
- PS526 Unit 1: CBT Model of Addiction Post
- PS526 Unit 2: Functional Analysis Case Study
- PS526 Unit 3: Process Addiction Case Study
- PS526 Unit 5: Community Reinforcement Case Study
- PS526 Unit 6: Ethics Case Critique
- PS526 Unit 7: Family Involvement Case Study
- PS526 Unit 8: Discussion Board Post
- PS526 Unit 9: Sociocultural Case Critique
- PS526 Unit 10: Integrated Case Study
- PS501 Unit 4: Disciplines of Psychology Post
- PS521 Unit 4: Group Archetype Simulation Post
- PS508 Unit 4: HIPAA and Part 2 Post
- PS516 Unit 4: Sedative Combinations Post
PS526 Unit 4 questions, answered
Can a counselor in recovery attend the same meetings as clients?
It is a common dilemma; most guidance favors discussing it openly and finding other meetings where possible.
Does the NAADAC code ban all dual relationships?
No. It bans sexual relationships and exploitation and asks counselors to manage unavoidable ones carefully.
What should a reply add?
Another option for resolving the classmate's dilemma.
Where can I find a free PS526 Unit 4 sample paper?
The PS526 Unit 4 post on a counselor meeting a former client at the only Saturday AA meeting is above, replies included.
What does the counselor decide in the PS526 Unit 4 sample?
To switch to a meeting in Belle Fourche for six months, after asking the client what he preferred, and to document the decision.