Ethical dilemmas that pull us in different and often irreconcilable directions are a part of professional life as therapists. With a true dilemma there is probably no right answer, yet we still need to decide what to do or not do and commit ourselves to the decision bearing in mind our ethical and professional responsibilities. The following vignette shows how I responded to an ethical dilemma in my clinical practice as a trainee person centred psychotherapist. I chose this dilemma as it highlights the issue of boundary lines as a crucial aspect of effective and safe client-counsellor relationships.

I run as a regular pastime with my local running club which is held on a mid week evening. My partner and I arrived at the club and bumbped into one of my clients, whom I had been counselling for two months. He had come to counselling as he had difficulty in forming personal relationships and was feeling lonely and depressed. The following day my client sent an email inviting my partner and I for dinner, suggesting we became friends. I considered the overlapping therapy and non-therapy contact to be problematic as it would involve entering a dual relationship with my client. Gabriel (2001) offers a definition which distinguishes between non-therapy and therapy contact by suggesting that a dual relationship occurs when: “a one-to-one contracted therapy relationship between an individual in the role of ‘client’ and one in the role of ‘therapist’ overlaps into a non-therapy context or role.” (p. ?). I identified a situation which became ethically challenging as I felt my client had crossed a boundary. “The boundary in counselling can be perceived as a limit line, with inherent fluidity and permeability, as well as safety and security. It is a limit line that requires the thoughtful actions of the boundary rider, the counsellor, to monitor and repair where