Problem: Peer Response Instructions Respond to at least two colleagues to close out the "Boardroom" discussion: Ethical Reasoning: State whether you agree or disagree with their recommended sanction. If they chose "Revocation" and you chose "Suspension," explain the ethical nuances of your difference in opinion. (You do not need to cite codes or laws here.) Restoration of Trust: Suggest one specific action Dr. Keller or the Board could take to restore the public's trust in the counseling profession after such a public breach of ethics. Thank the Board member for their service in this case and inform them of one point they made that impressed you during the trial. The Recommended Sanction It is recommended that official consequences include mandatory ethics training, one year of supervised practice, and a comprehensive review of professional boundaries, with Dr. Keller responsible for the cost of his retraining. The Justification After therapy ended, Dr. Keller continued to contact Ms. Lila. This shows poor judgment and a failure to keep proper boundaries. Even though there is no clear proof that he meant harm, the emotional pain reported by Ms. Watson shows how serious it is when professional boundaries are not kept and when there is an imbalance of power in counseling. Counselors with an LCMHC license must keep clear, ethical boundaries to protect clients from becoming too dependent or confused. Also, during the process, Dr. Keller was somewhat defensive and did not fully admit. Need Assignment Help?