122820211Social Control Theory-Slides and data in

12/28/2021
1
Social Control Theory
-Slides and data in this outline are from Adler, Mueller, and
Laufer (2007, 2013, 2018, & 2022); Siegel
(2015); and modified by Manning (2007, 2013, 2015, 2018, &
2022).
T H E T H E O RY FAVO R E D BY M O S T C R I M I N O
LO G I S T
Social Control theory
Social control theory focuses on techniques and strategies that
regulate human behavior leading
to conformity or obedience to society’s rules.
Influences (family & school, religious beliefs, moral values ,
friends, & beliefs regarding
government).
12/28/2021
2
Theories of Social Control
MACROSOCIOLOGICAL STUDIES
Explore the legal system, particularly law

environment
Powerful groups
Social & economic government directives
MICROSOCIOLOGICAL STUDIES
Focus on informal systems
Data based on individuals
Examines one’s internal control system
Travis Hirschi
Social Bonds
Attachment: to parents, teachers, peers
Commitment: to conventional lines of action
◦ Educational goals
Involvement: with activities that promote the interests of
society
◦ Homework or after school programs
Beliefs: acceptance of societies values
◦ Belief that law are fair
Hirshi’s Hypothesis was that Stronger the bonds = less
delinquency & weaker bonds = increased
risk of delinquency
Scientific Research shows support:
◦ Hirshi conducted a self-report survey on 4,077 high school
students in CA.

12/28/2021
3
Critics of Hirschi’s Bond theory
Criticism of social bond theory
◦ The influence of friendship
◦ Drug abuser stick together
◦ Failure to achieve
◦ Failing in school = few legitimate means
◦ Deviant parents and peers
◦ Gang member also create social bonds.
◦ Mistaken causal order
◦ Deviance may brake parental bonds
◦ Hirschi also counters the critics
◦ These bonds are weak and only created out of need – drug
abuser will turn on one another.
Gresham Sykes and David Matza
Delinquency and Drift
Drift
◦ Most deviants also hold value in social norms.
◦ Must use tech. of neutralization to drift in and out of
criminality.
Observation of neutralization:

◦ Criminals sometimes voice guilt over their illegal acts.
◦ Offenders frequently respect and admire honest, law abiding
people (entertainers, & preachers).
◦ Criminal define whom they can victimize
◦ Criminals are not immune to the demands of conformity.
◦ They go to school, family functions and church.
12/28/2021
4
Gresham Sykes and David Matza
Delinquency and Drift
Techniques of neutralization:
◦ Denial of Responsibility
◦ Not my fault - accident
◦ Denial of Injury - No one hurt
◦ Denial of the Victim - Victim is no saint
◦ Condemnation of the Condemner
◦ Everyone has done worse things
◦ Appeal to Higher Loyalties
◦ Couldn’t let my friends down
◦ Studies show most adolescents know when they deviate
◦ So they use neutralization techniques to justify their behavior.

◦ Critics: Many adolescents have no empathy.
◦ Crimes are most often intraracial and within familiar areas.
Albert J. Reiss
Delinquency is the result of
◦ A failure to internalize socially accepted and prescribed norms
of behavior.
◦ A breakdown of internal controls
◦ A lack of social rules that prescribe behavior in the family,
school, and other important social groups.
Social Disorganization and crime
What if you grew up in the slums with your mother selling
heroin out of your apartment
◦ Where would you be?
While slums create more crime some individuals find a greater
stake in conformity and embrace
laws.
12/28/2021
5
Walter Reckless
Containment Theory
Containment Theory assumes that for every individual there
exists a containing external

structure and a protective internal structure, both of which
provide defense, protection, or
insulation against delinquency.
External
◦ Family, laws, and peers
Internal
◦ Self concept, ego and conscience
Walter Reckless
Outer Containment
A role that provides a guide for a persons activities (i.e.
Teacher/student).
A set of reasonable limits and responsibilities (i.e. Roles
defined).
An opportunity for the individual to achieve status.
◦ Promotion or graduation
Cohesion among members of a group including joint activity
and togetherness.
◦ Integrated and inclusive
A set of belongingness (i.e. identification with the group).
Identification with one or more persons within the group.
Provisions for supplying alternative ways and means of
satisfaction when one or more ways are
closed.

12/28/2021
6
Walter Reckless
Inner Containment
A good self-concept
Self control
A strong ego
A well developed conscience
A high frustration tolerance
A high sense of responsibility
General Theory of Crime
Travis Hirschi and Michael Gottfredson
Designed General Theory to explain and individuals propensity
to commit crime.
Assumes that the offenders have little control over their own
behavior and desires.
Crime is a function of poor self-control
◦ Poor child rearing, poor attachments
◦ People with low self control may drink too much, smoke and
have unwanted pregnancies.

12/28/2021
7
Theory Informed Policy
Delinquency prevention through teaching values.
Family – role model study habits.
School –bond youth to conventional systems
Neighborhood – federally funded programs can reduce crime
◦ Examples: crisis intervention centers,
◦ and mediation between schools and youth, youth and police
and youth and gang intervention.
Article Review Instructions
You will write three article reviews and if you choose, one extra
credit article review. You will select the article yourself by
searching the UWA Library Databases. The article you choose
should be a research article (has a hypothesis that is empirically
tested). Pick an article relevant to a topic covered in the weekly
readings. Each review is worth 15 points. The review should be
1-2 single-spaced pages in a 12-point font. It is in your best
interest to submit your review before it is due so you may check
your originality report and correct any spelling and grammatical
errors identified by the software program.
The purpose of the review is to provide students knowledge of
how research is conducted and reported. The main part of your
review needs to include the following information. Please
comment on these aspects of the article as part of your review.
Provide only the briefest summary of content. What I am most
interested in is your critique and connection to weekly readings.
Reference. Listed at the top of the paper in APA style.

Introduction. Read the introduction carefully. The introduction
should contain:
· A thorough literature review that establishes the nature of the
problem to be addressed in the present study (the literature
review is specific to the problem)
· The literature review is current (generally, articles within the
past 5 years)
· A logical sequence from what we know (the literature review)
to what we don't know (the unanswered questions raised by the
review and what this study intended to answer
· The purpose of the present study
· The specific hypotheses/research questions to be addressed.
· State the overall purpose of the paper. What was the main
theme of the paper?
· What new ideas or information were communicated in the
paper?
· Why was it important to publish these ideas?
Methods. The methods section has three subsections. The
methods sections should contain:
· The participants and the population they are intended to
represent (are they described as well in terms of relevant
demographic characteristics such as age, gender, ethnicity,
education level, income level, etc?).
· The number of participants and how the participants were
selected for the study

· A description of the tools/measures used and research design
employed.
· A detailed description of the procedures of the study including
participant instructions and whether incentives were given.
Results. The results section should contain a very thorough
summary of results of all analyses. This section should include:
· Specific demographic characteristics of the sample
· A thorough narrative description of the results of all statistical
tests that addressed specific hypotheses
· If there are tables and figures, are they also described in the
text?
· If there are tables and figures, can they be interpreted "stand
alone" (this means that they contain sufficient information in
the title and footnotes so that a reader can understand what is
being presented without having to go back to the text)?
Discussion. The discussion is where the author "wraps up the
research". This section should include:
· A simple and easy to understand summary of what was found
· Where the hypotheses supported or refuted?
· A discussion of how the author's findings compares to those
found in prior research
· The limitations of the study
· The implications of the findings to basic and applied
researchers and to practitioners

Critique.
In your opinion, what were the strengths and weaknesses of the
paper or document? Be sure to think about your impressions and
the reasons for them. Listing what the author wrote as
limitations is not the same thing as forming your own opinions
and justifying them to the reader.
· Were the findings important to a reader?
· Were the conclusions valid? Do you agree with the
conclusions?
· If the material was technical, was the technical material
innovative?
Conclusion.
Once you provide the main critique of the article, you should
include a final paragraph that gives me your overall impression
of the study. Was the study worthwhile? Was it well-written and
clear to those who may not have as much background in the
content area? What was the overall contribution of this study to
our child development knowledge base?
APA Format Review
If you are unfamiliar or a bit “rusty” on your APA format, you
may want to use the tutorial available through the APA website
which is listed on your syllabus.
Grading Criteria

I will grade your paper based upon:
· How well you followed directions (as indicated in this page)
· How thoroughly you used examples to support the critique
· How accurately you used APA format
· your organization, grammar, and spelling
· Integration of assigned weekly readings
NAVIGATING DUAL RELATIONSHIPS IN RURAL
COMMUNITIES
Jennifer L. J. Gonyea and David W. Wright
The University of Georgia
Terri Earl-Kulkosky
Fort Valley State University
The literature examining dual relationships in rural communities
is limited, and existing ethi-
cal guidelines lack guidelines about how to navigate these
complex relationships. This study
uses grounded theory to explore rural therapists’ perceptions of
dual relationship issues, the
perceived impact of minority and/or religious affiliation on the
likelihood of dual relation-
ships, and the ways rural therapists handle inevitable dual
relationship situations. All of the
therapists who participated in the study practiced in small
communities and encountered dual
relationship situations with regularity. The overarching theme
that emerged from the data
was that of using professional judgment in engaging in the

relationship, despite the fact that
impairment of professional judgment is the main objection to
dual relationships. This overall
theme contained three areas where participants felt they most
needed to use their judgment:
the level of benefit or detriment to the client, the context, and
the nature of the dual relation-
ship. Surprisingly, supervision and/or consultation were not
mentioned by the participants as
strategies for handling dual relationships. The results of this
study are compared with estab-
lished ethical decision-making models, and implications for the
ethical guidelines and appro-
priate ethical training are suggested.
The authors’ collective experiences of practicing in small
communities led us to question how
therapists in these communities handle the inevitability of dual
relationships. As we discussed
anecdotes from our respective practices, it became apparent that
tension exists between a client’s
desire to have a familiar therapist and the ethical standards of
our field. We turned to the American
Association for Marriage and Family Therapy (AAMFT) Code
of Ethics for answers about how
to navigate these delicate situations. Couple and family
therapists are admonished to “make every
effort to avoid [dual relationships] at all costs” (AAMFT, 2001;
p. 1); however, no mention is made
of how to accomplish this in settings with limited alternatives.
The issue of dual relationships in areas with limited alternatives
is complicated by clients’
attempts to self-match. Self-matching occurs when clients select
a therapist who shares their atti-
tudes, race, education, social class, and/or religion (Jones,

Botsco & Gorman, 2003; Whalley &
Hyland, 2009; Willging, Salvador & Kano, 2006; Wintersteen,
Mesinger & Diamond, 2005). Cli-
ents feel more comfortable discussing their lives and presenting
issues when they believe their ther-
apist holds the same values or shared cultural experience. A
large percentage of Americans living
in small communities may be able to achieve this owing to
homogeneity in small communities, but
not without creating ethical challenges for the therapist.
The ethical challenges for rural therapists are compounded when
they also belong to a minor-
ity group. In addition to the limited number of available
therapists in a small community, there are
Jennifer L. J. Gonyea, PhD, is a Lecturer and Undergraduate
Coordinator, Department of Child and Family
Development, The University of Georgia and in practice at
Samaritan Counseling Center of Northeast Georgia,
Athens Georgia; David W. Wright, PhD, is an Associate
Professor, Department of Child & Family Development,
The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia; Terri Earl-
Kulkosky, PhD, is an Assistant Professor, Department of
Behavioral Sciences, Fort Valley State University, Fort Valley,
Georgia.
This research was made possible through consultation with
Edwin Risler, PhD (Athens, GA) and the Georgia
Association for Marriage and Family Therapy Board and
members.

Address correspondence to Jennifer L. J. Gonyea, Department
of Child and Family Development, The
University of Georgia, Dawson 123, Athens, Georgia 30602; E-
mail: [email protected]
January 2014 JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY
THERAPY 125
Journal of Marital and Family Therapy
doi: 10.1111/j.1752-0606.2012.00335.x
January 2014, Vol. 40, No. 1, 125–136
far fewer minority therapists in general (AAMFT, 2004).
Therefore, when minority clients attempt
to self-match, there is a strong likelihood that a dual
relationship dilemma will be encountered.
Thisstudyaimstoexploreareasnotpreviouslyconsideredintheethics
literature,payingparticu-
lar attention to how therapists practicing in rural areas navigate
these complex relationships. The
next section provides the foundation for this study by reviewing
the unique set of circumstances and
community variables that increase the likelihood of dual
relationships in rural areas and the ways
existingethical decision-makingmodels fail to considerthe
challengesof rural practice.
CHALLENGES OF RURAL PRACTICE
Rural communities are partially defined by their isolation that
forces residents to rely more
heavily upon one another. Smaller communities have increased

potential for dual relationships, in
general, and those between clients and therapists in particular
(Erickson, 2001). Although the lack
of boundaries may seem natural and is often used as fodder for
sitcoms set in small communities,
in real-life, it sets the stage for dual relationship dilemmas.
For many residents, this closeness is positive and helps build
identity and sense of belonging
to that community in terms of Us versus Them. Therefore,
residents of rural areas are often hesi-
tant to seek services from an outsider (Murry, Heflinger, Suiter
& Brody, 2011) because they are
not to be trusted, which can lead to multiple levels of personal
and professional relationships. Fur-
ther, persons from rural areas may resent an outsider offering
assistance (Erickson, 2001; Jesse,
Dolbier & Blanchard, 2008).
Similarly, those who belong to a religious community or a
minority group may prefer profes-
sional services from someone within their group or at least from
someone who may share familiar
values. Research has found that people want a therapist and they
believe to be like themselves
(Jones et al., 2003; Wintersteen et al., 2005) and when clients’
ethnicity matches that of their thera-
pist, they attend more sessions and have a greater likelihood of
treatment completion (Erdur, Rude
& Baron, 2003).
Competing Ethical Principles
The absence of attention to how therapists in rural settings
navigate potential dual relation-
ships is compounded by the ambiguous and vague discussion of

dual relationships in the AAMFT
Code of Ethics, which states:
Marriage and family therapists are aware of their influential
positions with respect to
clients, and they avoid exploiting the trust and dependency of
such persons. Therapists,
therefore, make every effort to avoid conditions and multiple
relationships with clients
that could impair professional judgment or increase the risk of
exploitation (American
Association for Marriage & Family Therapy, 2001; p. 1).
If one’s interpretation of the code is that when multiple
relationship situations arise, MFTs
should ensure that these relationships do not impair professional
judgment or increase the risk of
client exploitation, then the dilemma is not “how to avoid dual
relationships,” but “how does one
tell when multiple relationships will impair professional
judgment” and “what is the obligation of
the therapist in warning or explaining the dilemma to the
client?”
It quickly becomes clear that the real problem is how to address
inevitable dual relationships,
rather than how to avoid them. Some suggestions include openly
discussing the inevitability and
potential of out of session contacts between therapist and client
(Faulkner & Faulkner, 1997) or
having a preconceived plan to negotiate social contacts with
clients and seek immediate consulta-
tion if boundaries feel threatened (Jennings, 1992).
Rural clinicians are likely to be professionally isolated, making
it difficult to obtain supervi-

sion or consultation. These clinicians may be secluded from the
mainstream of their profession and
may have limited colleagues from whom they can seek support,
collaboration, or supervision.
Rural therapists’ sense of isolation is also compounded by fewer
opportunities for professional
development, continuing education, and limited access to
support services.
These collegial issues also create a challenge to maintaining
client confidentiality (Weigel &
Baker, 2002). A client’s confidentiality can be compromised
through the “grapevine” in small
126 JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY
January 2014
communities when the client is seen leaving the therapist’s
office, parked in front of it, or even while
sitting in the waiting room. The few therapists in a rural area
often have regular contact with one
another, and informal conversations between providers can
increase threats to client confidential-
ity. Rural therapists rely on one another for professional
development and resources. Withdrawing
from such informal exchanges could alienate close colleagues
and leave a rural therapist with even
fewer resources. Rural therapists are left with the choice
between increased threats to clients’ rights
to privacy or alienation of a close colleague.
Models of Ethical Decision-Making
Many ethical decision-making models suggest the following for
the resolution of ethical dilem-

mas: (a) consulting the ethical guidelines of therapy
professions; (b) seeking supervision or consul-
tation with peers; (c) creating a pros and cons list to determine
the possible consequences and/or
alternative courses of action; or (d) some combination thereof
(Corey, Corey & Callahan, 1998;
Erickson, 2001; Forester-Miller & Davis, 1996; Smith & Smith,
2001; Steinman, Richardson &
McEnroe, 1998; Tarvydas, 1998; Welfel, 1998). As noted
previously, these guidelines may not pro-
vide enlightenment because they are ambiguous and require
interpretation, the very foundation of
the original dilemma!
Few existing models specifically refer to issues of power and
maneuverability, that is, the roles
and positions therapists take with clients. The professional
guidelines assume therapists hold the
position of power when interacting with clients. Yet, depending
on the nature of the out-of-session
contact, the client may occupy a powerful position in the
relationship. In a unique acknowledg-
ment of potential limitations to both sides of a dual
relationship, Haas and Malouf (1995) suggest
therapists ask themselves and their supervisors specific
questions prior to engaging in a potential
dual relationship. For example, how might engaging in the dual
relationship inhibit clients’ ability
to make autonomous decisions; how might the therapist
acknowledge his or her privileged position
in the relationship; will the dual relationship affect the
therapist’s ability to intervene effectively
and congruently. The suggested questions imply that the
therapist is able to conceive a number of
alternatives and have insight into multiple perspectives on the

situation, yet the inability to do so
when interacting with friends and relatives is precisely why
dual relationships are discouraged.
Most ethical decision-making models assume that therapists
have equal access to professional
resources across community types (rural compared to urban). In
fact, models ignore the existence
of barriers to obtaining supervision and consultation in rural
areas even though the limited avail-
ability of these in small communities has been well documented
(Weigel & Baker, 2002). None of
the models reviewed suggest alternatives to supervision or ways
of navigating a dual relationship
if, indeed, it is unavoidable. The potential consequences to
seeking consultation with peers or feed-
back from supervisors in rural communities are also not
addressed in the ethical decision-making
models reviewed for this study.
Clearly, one model or set of ethical standards does not
encompass all possible dual relation-
ship dilemmas or all the factors contributing to it. Therefore, a
more comprehensive exploration of
the processes through which clinicians make ethical decisions is
called for. To meet that goal, this
study specifically examines (a) the ways rural therapists
perceive dual relationships and the result-
ing impact on clinical practice; (b) the strategies clinicians
believe they employ to negotiate dual
relationships; and (c) the perceived influence of minority or
religious affiliation on dual relation-
ship situations.
METHOD

Design of the Study
This study used a naturalistic paradigm to explore the
experiences of therapists in rural set-
tings. Among Lincoln and Guba’s (1985) naturalistic paradigm
axioms, several were relevant here:
(a) realities are multiple, constructed, and holistic; (b) the
knower and the known are inseparable;
therefore, the participant and researcher influence one another;
(c) generalization is only possible
through the formulation of working hypotheses that are context
and time specific; and (d) unlike
traditional inquiry that is value-free, the naturalist paradigm
states that inquiry is value-bound by
the choice of the problem, theory, and context.
THERAPY 127
This study sought to explore how rural therapists interpreted the
AAMFT ethical guidelines
as they made decisions about whether to have dual relationships
with the clients they served. Their
experiences then constituted multiple realities and, while tied
professionally to the ethical guide-
lines, their interpretation of the guidelines allowed the therapist
to construct their understanding
and approaches to ethical dilemmas of dual relationships. This
qualitative approach allowed for
an emphasis on the participant’s view (Creswell, 1998) of their
experience of dual relationships in
rural areas and how they navigate such situations. Specifically,
the present study questions how
the experience of dual relationships decision-making is handled

when the therapist’s professional
supports are limited.
Description of Participants and Selection Process
Participants were Clinical and Associate members of an
AAMFT Division in the Southeast
practicing in rural areas. Rural areas were selected using the
categories of urbanicity established by
Bachtel (2004) at the county level: Urban, Suburban, Rural
Growth, and Rural Decline. Approxi-
mately, 50 members were in the pool of potential participants.
Once the purposive sample was drawn from the current listing
of active members of the Divi-
sion, participants were contacted via telephone based on
information provided in the Division
directory. After providing verbal consent, telephone interviews
were conducted. Multiple research-
ers were involved in gathering the data through phone
interviews, and this served as one of the
forms of investigator triangulation (Denzin, 1978). Attempts to
contact the 50 members were
made, and six therapists participated in the phone interviews.
Some participants expressed a desire
to have more time to reflect on the questions. The researchers
experience confirmed that additional
data collection methods could provide more respondents and
richer data. Therefore, researchers
decided on an additional data collection method, which would
be to collect data at the annual
Division Spring Conference.
Conference attendees self-selected to participate in the study
after hearing it described and
announced. An additional screening by the authors was used to

ensure that participants met the
criteria established at the outset of the study. Attendees were
provided consent forms and study
questions on the first day of the conference and asked to return
both by noon on the last day. This
ensured that participants were able to reflect on their
experiences and practices to give as detailed
explanations as possible. Participants provided information
about the population size in their
practicing area and completed survey forms where they
provided demographic information such
as age, race, type of practice, and length of practice. In
addition, participants provided their
perception of the degree to which their minority or religious
affiliation influenced requests for
therapeutic services from acquaintances in other settings, and
how they make decisions in response
to these requests.
Between telephone interviews and the annual Division
conference, fifteen therapists pro-
vided data for this study. Of these, five self-identified as
African American, one self-identified
as racially mixed (Caucasian and Phillipina), and the remaining
nine participants self-identified
as Caucasian. Participant ages ranged from 29 to 60; however,
most participants reported
having been in practice for over 20 years. All practiced in areas
designated as rural according
to Bachtel (2004). Participants practiced in either private (N =
6) or public settings (N = 6),
while three practiced in both types of settings. Seven
participants practiced in catchment areas
whose populations were 20,000–50,000, six practiced in
catchment areas whose populations
were 50,000–100,000, and two of the participant’s catchment

areas were over 100,000 people.
Some worked in communities that served more than one county,
or in counties that served
multiple cities.
A detailed description of participant demographics is provided
to illustrate several consider-
ations regarding the results. First, the participants in this study
represent very experienced clini-
cians, the majority having practiced more than 20 years. The
perception of one’s ability to
navigate complex dual relationships may be related to a sense of
clinical competency evident in an
experienced sample. Second, how long clinicians had lived in
their rural community is unknown, a
factor that may influence the likelihood of dual relationships.
And lastly, most of the participants
worked at least part time in public settings where they may or
may not have control over the
decision to see the a client known in another setting.
January 2014
Data Analysis
An interview guide (see Appendix A) was developed with open-
ended questions that invited
the participants to convey their experiences with dual
relationships in rural communities. This
interview guide provided a common set of questions for all
participants, and left room to explore
new areas that might emerge. Data were analyzed using a
sorting procedure that calls for searching

for what Wolcott (1994) terms patterned regularities in the data.
We looked for common themes
and patterns of behavior that would give an understanding of
the experiences of the participants.
Participant responses were then compared with the suggested
procedures for ethical decision-
making reported earlier.
Our analysis process was guided by grounded theory (Charmaz,
2002; Glaser & Strauss,
1967); a qualitative methodology used with the goal of finding
new theory or emerging themes in
phenomena studied. This method seemed most appropriate to
the limited understanding of how
dual relationship dilemmas are handled by clinicians when such
dilemmas are frequent or inevita-
ble. Consistent with a grounded theory approach, data collected
from the first interview were
compared with data from the second interview, and this process
of comparison was repeated with
each data collection (Strauss & Corbin, 1998).
Each phone interview was transcribed by the research
interviewer, and non-phone written
interviews were reviewed. The interviewers (J.G. and T.K.)
recorded notes immediately following
the data collection. These process notes included clarification
questions asked, information on the
date and type of contact, insights, questions, and connections to
other responses.
The research investigators then carefully examined the data and
completed the task of com-
parison, developing new categories relative to the answers.
Open coding methods (Charmaz, 2002)
were used to organize the data, and initial categories were

developed. Themes emerged from the
categories and subcategories as data analysis continued. These
themes are discussed in detail in the
results section that follows.
Trustworthiness and Credibility
To ensure trustworthiness (Merriam, 1998) and credibility,
qualitative terms that are similar
to reliability and external validity, we used detailed
descriptions of the research methods and credi-
bility audits to review the research methods, interviews, and
findings. A licensed marital and family
therapy (MFT), who has practiced for more than 20 years,
served as an internal auditor of the data
to open code the data from the interviews and written responses.
In addition, an external auditor
(2nd author) reviewed all drafts of the results to verify that the
categories and themes were consis-
tent with the interviews.
Transferability, the degree to which a study can be applied to
other contexts by different
researchers, was established by providing detailed information
about the participants and contex-
tual factors that may be relevant to future research efforts. For
example, the Appendix A reports
the guiding questions used and the demographic information,
such as practice setting, catchment
population, and years in practice are reported in the following
section.
RESULTS
Although interviews varied somewhat, participant responses
reflected the inevitability of dual

relationships in rural areas, consistent with the existing
literature. As expected, a common experience
among participants was receiving referrals for persons that they
knew in other settings on a frequent
or occasional basis. Also as expected, participants received
referrals based on religious and minority
affiliation,althoughmostof these were basedonreligious as
opposedto minority affiliation.
Similar themes emerged across clinicians in terms of how they
handled potential dual relation-
ship situations. The therapists who participated in this study
universally referred the potential
client elsewhere when the referral was well known. Among
those that made referrals to avoid the
dual relationship, they took care to explain the dual relationship
dilemma to clients in order to
preserve the existing relationship and ease the transition to a
trusted colleague. For example:
The most common type of referral comes from my church. I
usually refer them on and
explain the problem inherent in dual relationships. Generally,
people are clueless about
THERAPY 129
this [dual relationships] issue and appear disappointed but do
okay once they get started
with a colleague.
Even among those who reported engaging in the relationship
initially, all stressed the impor-

tance of evaluation and assessment at the beginning of therapy.
For example, several participants
engaged in two to four sessions during which they assessed the
clients’ needs, their own ability to
meet those needs, and the likelihood that the therapeutic
relationship might violate the ethical
guidelines by potentially “exploiting the trust and dependency
of such persons” or “impair profes-
sional judgment or increase the risk of exploitation” (American
Association for Marriage &
Family Therapy, 2001; p. 1). One participant reported engaging
in the relationship:
depending on my conversation with the referral, for a 3 or 4
session evaluation with the
clear understanding that I may make a referral, continue to see
the client myself, or have
a professional consultant in the fourth session to help us decide
the appropriate next
phase.
Strategies for Handling Dual Relationships
During the open coding procedure, responses developed into the
overarching theme of profes-
sional judgment which contained three areas where participants
felt they most needed to use this
judgment: (a) level of benefit or detriment to the client; (b) the
context; and (c) the nature of the
dual relationship.
Professional judgment. Whether explicit or implied,
participants’ approach suggested they
had used professional guidelines as the source of their decision-
making. One participant discussed
the “limits of therapy,” while another came to an agreement that

“boundaries will be kept” with
the clients with whom he or she entered into a dual relationship.
Elaborating on how boundaries
were kept, one participant stated:
NOT discussing client info with staff. When necessary for
support, speak vaguely to the
school counselor. Make it clear to students and any others I see
in community that I do
not/will not identify them seek them out in public social
settings. I also make it clear that
I do not/will not identify other clients—or talk about them any
professional relationship
to anyone. Clarity around boundaries is extremely important in
maintaining them.
Several participants appeared to use a strict interpretation of the
AAMFT ethical guidelines
concerning therapy with persons known from other contexts,
unequivocally stating that they
would refer the client elsewhere based on their understanding of
“making every effort to avoid . . .
multiple relationships” (American Association for Marriage &
Family Therapy, 2001; p. 1). These
participants did not disclose any conditions under which they
would agree to conduct therapy with
persons known from other contexts.
Professional judgment is a broad category and precisely the
aspect of navigating complex rela-
tionships that this study was undertaken to explore. When
prompted about how they used their pro-
fessional judgment, participants elaborated on how they make
the decision to refer the client or
engage in the dual relationship. Participants were aware of the
people or groups with whom they are

mostexperiencedor thosethetherapist feltmostcompetent
inhelpingand with whomtheyweremost
likely to engage in therapy: one partipant reported, “I know I
work best with couples, single adults of
adolescents, not children and not addictive adults.” Several
noted the client’s need for treatment, the
severity of the presenting issue, intake information, or expertise
in couples versus family work as
issues to consider when deciding to take the case. For example,
when participants felt that the client
needed immediate intervention and making a referral might
delay treatment, they were more willing
to engage in a dual relationship. In this case, ensuring that the
client received timely therapy was tem-
porarilyprioritized over the admonishment to avoidadual
relationship.
The remaining three emergent themes reflect specific aspects of
the dual relationships decision-
making articulated by participants. Although participants used
their professional judgment in each
of these areas, they were specific enough to warrant separate
elements.
Level of benefit or detriment to client. Promoting clients’ well-
being was a factor in most deci-
sions therapists’ decision-making in their clinical practice.
Specifically, they used their judgment
January 2014
about the degree of benefit to the client when deciding whether
or not to engage in a dual

relationship: one stated “professional judgment and instinct
regarding my ability to be helpful to
the client.” In the words of one participant, he or she was aware
of the potential “negative impact
of a dual relationship” on the clients well-being and the existing
relationship. Despite this senti-
ment, many participants specifically mentioned that the dual
relationship was a lesser concern than
promoting client safety. For example, one therapist would
“suggest another referral unless an
emergency or crisis is presented.”
Another aspect of benefit to the client used as a deciding factor
in engaging in the dual rela-
tionship was whether or not the client would not have sought
therapy. A participant provided an
example of such a circumstance:
I have made one exception and accepted a client who told me
she checked me out care-
fully at church and would otherwise not go to another therapist.
She disclosed a ritual
abuse history and indicated a need to feel safe first since some
of her abusers were trusted
people in positions of authority.
For this therapist, engaging in the relationship meant the
particular client was able to receive
services. Other participants’ responses suggest that they use
their judgment about what the client
needs and what they can offer at that time as means of
determining whether or not to pursue the
dual relationship.
Context. Participants indicated concerns about the context
within which they knew the

potential client. One participant differentiated between contexts
such as “church affiliate versus
friend,” while another made the distinction between “whether I
know them personally or profes-
sionally” as influential factors in their decision to pursue a
therapeutic relationship or refer a client
to another therapist. Participants were more willing to conduct
therapy with a professional associ-
ate than with a personal associate. A few were very specific in
their understanding of a need to keep
personal and professional relationships separate, responding “I
would not see someone with whom
I have a personal relationship” or “I don’t see family members
of friends or acquaintances.” Others
made decisions based on a more graduated sense of the personal
acquaintance. One participant
considered taking the case of someone with whom he or she had
a professional relationship to be
unlikely to impair professional judgment or exploit clients and
therefore upholding the ethical
standards of the field. Another participant noted receiving
referrals from a sister program and
would engage in the dual relationship in the interest of
“continuum of care.”
Therapist participants were more likely to engage in the dual
relationship if he or she has
expertise with a particular population or presenting issue that
was otherwise unavailable in the
area, in part out of the belief that the particular treatment the
therapist offers is unique and that it
would be an undue hardship to the client to pursue this unique
help elsewhere. For example:
Trauma using Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing
(EMDR) is my specialty

—if it is a very slight acquaintance (i.e., plumber, workman,
etc) I would have to think
about it as I am, to the best of my knowledge, the only one
using EMDR.
Nature of relationship. The nature of the relationship was
considered a separate theme from
that of context and was based on a distinction between type of
relationship (context) and the level
of intimacy or closeness in the relationship with a client (nature
of the relationship). Examples
from responses include the influence of “the degree of
interaction outside therapy,” “if I do not
have an intimate relationship with them I will see them,” and “if
I know we will socialize I will
refer” as more intimate levels of contact with potential clients
that would preclude a therapeutic
relationship. Participants distinguished between a high level of
intimacy (personal relationships)
and low levels of intimacy (professional relationships) and
considered high levels of intimacy to be
a barrier to a successful therapeutic relationship. Participants
defined knowing someone “well” in
one or more of the following ways: (a) persons with whom they
socialized; (b) persons with whom
their children played; (c) friends; (d) family
members/acquaintances of friends; (e) students where a
spouse works; and (f) sharing a specific activity.
Participants might engage in a professional relationship with
someone known from the gym
or an exercise class owing to the low levels of intimacy
involved, but they were aware of their influ-
ential positions and potential likelihood of their impaired
professional judgment when the current

THERAPY 131
relationship was one where there was a high frequency of
contact and a high degree of intimacy,
such as a through a Bible study group or book club.
DISCUSSION
The strategies participants used to determine whether or not to
refer a potential client reflect
several aspects of the ethical decision-making models reviewed,
although they did not use any
model in its entirety. The four strategy themes derived from
participant responses are present in
some of the ethical decision-making models previously outlined.
Conversely, seemingly, important
aspects of the models are absent from participant responses and
discussed below.
Professional Judgment
Despite the underlying assumptions about the inherent risks to
judgment in a dual relation-
ship, the primary tool for navigating the complexity of a dual
relationship among our participants
was the use of their professional judgment. Consistent with the
question posed in the conceptuali-
zation of this study, therapists practicing in small communities
appear to be aware of this integral
conflict and ask themselves, “How do I tell when multiple
relationships will impair my professional
judgment?” These results indicate that therapists are intentional
in handling potential dual rela-

tionships to minimize the impact on their ability to effectively
manage the therapy process.
Although not explicitly stated in any of the models reviewed for
this study, virtually all of
them imply using professional judgment. Several advise
generating a list of potential courses of
action along with the possible consequences of these actions
(Corey et al., 1998; Forester-Miller &
Davis, 1996; Smith & Smith, 2001; Steinman et al., 1998;
Tarvydas, 1998; Welfel, 1998). The
results of this study add to the ethical decision-making
literature and supplement the AAMFT
Code of Ethics by indicating specific aspects of the therapeutic
relationship therapists in practice
should consider when exploring courses of action and their
consequences, for example, judgments
about client motivation, the therapists’ ability to be helpful to
the client, the potential for triangu-
lation, and the three specific themes discussed below.
Level of Benefit or Detriment
It is clear that dual relationships are discouraged, yet therapists
may engage in them anyway if
they believe it will yield more benefit than harm for the client.
A therapists’ main goal is for clients
to grow, improve, and heal. Toward this end, therapists were
intentional in assessing the potential
harm to the client and the probable benefits.
Thisthemereflectsthemodelsthatsuggesttherapistsweighthepotent
ialrisksandbenefitstosee-
ing the client. Only Gottlieb (1993) proposes discussing with
the client the potential consequences or
what their relationship posttherapy might entail should they

engage in the dual relationship. The
majority of attention is focused on how contact outside of
sessions prior to and during therapy might
impede the therapeutic process. Posttherapy contact is
particularly important for those practicing in
asmall communitywhere thelikelihood of suchcontactsin the
communityisvery high.
Haas and Malouf (1995) suggest therapists ask themselves to
reflect on their ability to be help-
ful. It is a therapist’s obligation to best meet the needs of their
client, but also their prerogative to
refuse cases when they are not able to meet those needs. For
example, if a therapist realizes that
she would be limited in what issues she can address and how
she can address them, she might not
be able to provide quality therapy and would consider
discussing that with the clients. An impor-
tant point for consideration is that the results of this study
indicate that therapists practicing in
small communities may not feel they have the same latitude to
refuse a case when the assessment of
the situation suggests that the client would be more harmed by
their refusal.
Kitchener’s (1988) model also addresses power, but through the
understanding of the different
roles, one might have in dual relationships. For example, one
partner in a couple’s session is the
principal of the school the therapist’s child attends. In session,
the therapist may be perceived as
having power. During interactions with the school, the principal
is clearly in a position of power,
not only with the therapist, but also her or his child. Therapists
who practice in small communities
are well aware of these types of power dynamics and consi dered

them in assessing the level of bene-
fit or detriment to the client as well as the context and nature of
the relationship discussed below.
January 2014
Context and Nature of the Relationship
The models reviewed herein do not attend to contexts in which
decisions are made about
ethical dilemmas. The lack of distinction between contexts may
lead to the assumption that all out
of session contacts between client and therapist are equally
problematic to the process and
outcome of therapy. The therapists in this study felt that there
are differences between types of
relationships (context) and the levels of intimacy (nature of the
relationship) inherent in the
different types.
Most therapists have encountered a client outside of therapy,
either at the grocery store, the
dry cleaners, or a physician’s office. Usually these meetings are
unexpected and spontaneous. In the
case of a dual relationship, the assumption is that meetings
outside of therapy are expected and at
times may even be regular, as in the case of a fellow
parishioner. A consistent theme in the responses
of the participants reflected an attempt to understand the
context and the nature of the relationship
between therapist and client outside of the therapy room, or in
other words, attempt to determine
the regularity with which they might see one another and the

quality of their out of session relation-
ship, consistent with the models proposed by Smith and Smith
(2001) and Gottlieb (1993).
This is an important point because the limited number of couple
and family therapists who
represent cultural or religious minorities is likely to present an
increased potential for dual rela-
tionships as clients attempt to self-match. This is underscored
by a survey of AAMFT membership
(2004), which reported that the overwhelming majority of their
members reported being White/
NonHispanic (93%: n = 2236) with approximately only 2% of
respondents falling in each of the
following groups: African American, Hispanic/Latino, Asian,
American Indian, and Other/Prefer
not to answer.
The energy and attention necessary for handling a dual
relationship is usually greater than
that of another client. The therapist participants acknowledged
this additional investment by
considering whether or not they actually have enough time to
handle such a case and its unique
circumstances. This very specific, and practical consideration is
not present in the reviewed models.
In fact, a number of everyday impediments to rural practice are
not mentioned in the models, but
should be added to the list of practical obstacles to rural
practice.
Supervision and/or Consultation
The literature on ethical dilemmas in rural areas notes the
increased likelihood of encounter-
ing dual relationships and limited access to supervision. Two

points strongly reflected in the results
of this study; one through its prominence and the other through
its absence. The rural therapists in
this study generated the same concerns and issues that are
represented in the literature regarding
the increased potential for dual relationships. Study participants
received referrals or were sought
out by persons known to them in other settings and that these
referrals came from a number of
community sources: fellow church members, family members of
friends, parents of children’s class-
mates, persons with whom spouse has a professional
relationship, and persons with whom the
therapist has a professional relationship (e.g., dentist, plumber,
other therapist).
Notably, absent in participants’ responses was mention of
bringing these dual relationship
issues to supervision to reflect on the potential consequences;
however, it is unclear whether the
availability of supervision is limited in the areas where
participants practice or whether the partici-
pants do not consider supervision as one of the tools useful in
navigating dual relationships. As
noted earlier, one participant did report using a consultant “in
the fourth session to help us decide
the appropriate next phase.” This participant used consultation
as part of the therapeutic decision-
making process rather than as a means of determining, a priori,
potential problems associated with
the dual relationship or as feedback in maintaining healthy
boundaries in an ongoing dual rela-
tionship. Although intended to clarify the dual relationship, it is
equally likely that the use of a
consultant, a role different from a supervisor, may create an
additional dual relationship that rural

therapists must navigate.
A lack of supervision and consultation opportunities may
possibly contribute to ethical con-
cerns resulting from limited access to clinical resources.
Suggestions for therapists to remedy this
concern and obtain supervision have included group, telephone,
and Internet supervision, yet each
presents problems (Kanz, 2001; Weigel & Baker, 2002). For
group supervision, practitioners from
rural areas may have to drive several hundred miles to receive
supervision or risk discussing a client
THERAPY 133
with whom someone else in the group has a relationship.
Telephone supervision provides one
option for supervisees who may be geographically isolated, but
there are still some ethical consid-
erations. Sending recorded sessions in the mail increases threats
to confidentiality; cell phones are
an insecure method of discussing client information that could
potentially be intercepted, and the
amount of time and expense to send recordings via postal
service may be prohibitive. The availabil-
ity of Internet supervision is alluring, yet presents concerns
about (a) divulging confidential infor-
mation over an insecure mode of communication; (b) the
difficulty in obtaining informed consent
from clients for this type of supervision; (c) the importance of
nonverbal cues of the therapist,
supervisor, and client; and (d) liability and licensure issues
when Internet supervision takes place

across state lines (Kanz, 2001).
CONCLUSION
An objective of this study was to gather data to illustrate the
complexities of dual relationships
in rural areas. The overwhelming majority of the rural therapists
who participated in this study did
face the dilemmas of dual relationships. Indeed, most had fairly
well-established strategies for han-
dling these relationships both before and during treatment.
The hope is that this research will foster a better understanding
of the complexities of dual
relationships in rural areas as well as support further research in
this area. The results of this study
may serve to clarify ethical guidelines around dual relationships
in both the literature and practice.
The qualitative exploration utilized in this study allowed the
researchers to begin to understand
the way therapists think about their process for ethical decision-
making. Follow-up interviews with
therapists who are in the process of evaluating a dual
relationship situation in their rural communi-
ties would greatly enhance our understanding of the practice of
ethical decision-making. Also,
interviews focusing on the themes derived from this study
would address the multiple obstacles to
confidentiality and maintaining therapeutic boundaries in small
communities.
The implications of this study are significant: it seems clear that
the nature of these relation-
ships is more than duality. Participants noted that whether a
relationship is personal or profes-
sional, the types of boundaries regulating it, and the context of

out-of-session contacts as
important factors in making ethical decisions. The consideration
of these factors in decision-mak-
ing reflects the reality that dual relationships are inevitable in
small communities and places more
emphasis on evaluating the process of therapy than on the
duality. In the words of one participant,
“I live in a community of 5,000—if I am going to work, I must
navigate these crossovers.”
This has implications for MFT training programs’ curriculum
regarding AAMFT ethical
guidelines and the ethical guidelines in general. The current
guidelines do not address the process
for decision-making with regard to dual relationships. Programs
can help therapists in training
develop a more introspective and less legalistic decision-making
process, which would address the
complexity of mitigating factors and provide an opportunity for
them to explore their own biases
in a supportive environment.
Clients want to be in relationships with people like themselves
and often look for therapists
that they believe have similar values or experience.
Unfortunately, in rural communities where the
pool of available therapists is often limited, practicing
therapists have little guidance in how to
make an ethical decision because of the ambiguity of the ethical
guidelines and the neglect of the
challenges to rural practice in existing ethical decision-making
models. These therapists may also
have difficulty navigating complex dual relationships because
there are few opportunities for super-
vision in their communities. Instead, they learn to rely on their
professional judgment about the

level of benefit or detriment to the client and therapeutic
relationship and the context and the
nature of the relationship as they make their decisions about
engaging in it.
REFERENCES
American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. (2001).
Code of ethical principles for marriage and family
therapists. Washington, DC: American Association for Marriage
and Family Therapy.
American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. (2004).
2004 Member survey results. Washington, DC:
American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy.
January 2014
Bachtel, D. (2004). Georgia facts and figures. Retrieved
February 8, 2011, from http://www.fcs.uga.edu/hace/gafacts/.
Charmaz, K. (2002). Qualitative interviewing and grounded
theory analysis. In J. F. Grubrium & J. A. Holstein
(Eds.), Handbook of interview research: context and method
(pp. 675–693). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Corey, G., Corey, M., & Callahan, P. (1998). Issues and ethics
in the helping professions (5th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA:
Brooks/Cole.

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design:
choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act (2nd ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Erdur, O., Rude, S., & Baron, A. (2003). Symptom improvement
and length of treatment in ethnically similar and dis-
similar clients-therapist pairings. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 50(1), 52–58.
Erickson, S. H. (2001). Multiple relationships in rural
counseling. The Family Journal, 9(3), 302–304.
Faulkner, I. K., & Faulkner, T. A. (1997). Managing multiple
relationships in rural communities: Neutrality and
boundary violations. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice,
4, 1–16.
Forester-Miller, H., & Davis, T. (1996). A practitioner’s guide
to ethical decision making. American Counseling
Association. Retrieved March 13, 2012, from:
http://counseling.org/Counselors/Practitioners Guide.aspx?
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of
grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing Company.
Gottlieb, M. C. (1993). Avoiding exploitative dual
relationships: A decision-making model. Psychotherapy, 30,
41–48.
Haas, L., & Malouf, J. (1995). Keeping up the good work: A

practitioner’s guide to mental health ethics. Sarasota, FL:
Professional Resource Press.
Jennings, F. (1992). Ethics of rural practice. In R. D. Weitz
(Ed.), Psychological practice in small towns and rural areas
(pp. 85–104). New York: Haworth.
Jesse, D. E., Dolbier, C. L., & Blanchard, A. (2008). Barriers to
seeking help and treatment suggestions for prenatal
depressive symptoms: Focus groups with rural low income
women. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 29, 3–19.
Jones, M. A., Botsco, M., & Gorman, B. S. (2003). Predictors of
psychotherapeutic benefit of lesbian, gay, and
bisexual clients: The effects of sexual orientation matching and
other factors. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research,
Practice, Training, 40(4), 289–301.
Kanz, J. (2001). Clinical-Supervision.com: Issues in the
provision of online supervision. Professional Psychology:
Research & Practice, 32(4), 415–421.
Kitchener, K. (1988). Dual role relationships: What makes them
so problematic? Journal of Counseling and Develop-
ment, 67, 217–221.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study
applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
Publishers.
Murry, V. M., Heflinger, C. A., Suiter, S. V., & Brody, G. H.
(2011). Examining perceptions about mental health care
and help-seeking among rural African American families with
adolescents. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 40,
1118–1131.
Smith, J., & Smith, A. (2001). Dual relationships and
professional integrity: An ethical dilemma case of a family
counselor. The Family Journal, 9(4), 438–443.
Steinman, S., Richardson, N., & McEnroe, T. (1998). The
ethical decision making manual for helping professionals.
Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). The basics of qualitative
research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tarvydas, V. (1998). Ethical decision making processes. In R.
R. Cottone & V. M. Tarvydas (Eds.), Ethical and
professional issues in counseling (pp. 144–155). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Weigel, D., & Baker, B. (2002). Unique issues in rural couple
and family counseling. The Family Journal, 10(1),
61–69.
Welfel, E. (1998). Ethics in counseling and psychotherapy:

Standards, research, and emerging issues. Pacific Grove,
CA: Brooks/Cole.
Whalley, B., & Hyland, M. E. (2009). One size does not fit all:
Motivational predictors of contextual benefits of
therapy. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research &
Practice, 82, 291–303.
Willging, C. E., Salvador, M., & Kano, M. (2006). Pragmatic
help-seeking: How sexual and gender minority groups
access mental health care in a rural state. Psychiatric Services,
57(6), 871–874.
Wintersteen, M. B., Mesinger, J. L., & Diamond, G. S. (2005).
Do gender and racial differences between patient and
therapist affect therapeutic alliance and treatment retention in
adolescents? Professional Psychology: Research &
Practice, 36(4), 400–408.
Wolcott, H. F. (1994). Transforming qualitative data:
Description, analysis and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
THERAPY 135
AAPPENDIX
GUIDING INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR CLINICIANS

The following questions were used as a guideline during phone
interviews and distributed to partici-
pants at the annual Division Spring Conference for review. The
researchers gave a brief description of
the purpose of the study and a consent script, either at the
beginning of the interview or in writing for
those recruited at the Division Conference.
1. I am interested in knowing more about your experiences as a
family therapist practicing
in a small community. Do you receive referrals for clients that
you already know from
another setting?
a. (If yes) Help us understand how you think about these
referrals? (factors you con-
sider, type of relationships, specific examples).
2. What are the settings that you might know some of these
referrals from?
3. Describe how you respond to these requests for therapy from
people you already know?
(Appropriate follow-up questions as needed to understand the
factors.)
4. What influences your decision to see the client? (Appropriate
follow-up questions as
needed to understand the factors.)
5. What influences your decision to refer the client?
(Appropriate follow-up questions as
needed to understand the factors.)
6. Tell us about a time you received a referral from your
religious or minority community?
a. Which affiliation?

b. How do you think knowing the person/family impacts your
ability to conduct ther-
apy with the person or family?
7. What is your perception of how often you get referrals based
on this affiliation?
January 2014
Copyright of Journal of Marital & Family Therapy is the
property of Wiley-Blackwell and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted
to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users
may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.

122820211Social Control Theory-Slides and data in

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 122820211Social Control Theory-Slides and data in

Similar to 122820211Social Control Theory-Slides and data in (20)

More from CicelyBourqueju

More from CicelyBourqueju (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

122820211Social Control Theory-Slides and data in