Whistleblower Counselor Selection Guideposts
- Telling the truth is not the problem. Call this webmaster old-fashioned
or naive, but lying does not solve problems. It does
break trust. Any counselor who encourages
lying is inviting trouble down the road,
not being supportive. He or she may well
be deluding himself or herself, as well as
his or her client. Remember, the whistleblower
probably revealed the crime, fraud or mismanagement
because keeping silent led to internal unrest,
those spiritual issues. And the employee
has probably sought therapy because of the
experiences of losses, especially of trust
and hope and colleagues' support. A minor
point--all too often a therapist fudges insurance
paperwork or otherwise gets paid using some
form of deceit. These therapists too might
ill-serve whistleblowers. Part of the problem
is that many counselors have little training
in their profession's ethics, and few brush-up
on an ongoing basis. It's easy to label clients
with ethical issues "unduly judgmental"
(a judgment in itself) instead of addressing
morality, or their own fears or limitations.
- It's more than just credentials. Education and experience are easily checked.
Modern professional training for lawyers
and therapists includes detachment and relationship
guidelines. It's not the responsibility of
a stressed-out client, who generally does
not know those standards and also is in no
shape to apply them. These professions agree
that a professional engaging in sex with
a client has impaired (rather than enhanced)
the professional relationship. Less clear
cut are the lines concerning emotional overreaching
or abuse--what's professional detachment
and what's too much passivity for effectiveness
or too much imposing the professional's pet
theories and issues. IMHO, any mental health
or spiritual counselor who forbids outside
socialization or reading is probably too
immature, insecure or just plain cult-like
to help much in the long run. Similarly,
if an attorney will not address spiritual
and mental health issues, at least by suggesting
several alternative contacts, the attorney
may not be experienced in this area of law.
- This isn't about martyrdom. Unsympathetic outsiders and even perpetrators
spread this as a myth about the whistleblowers's
mindset. Why bother competitively comparing
the retaliation you have experienced against
someone else's trauma? Martyrdom in the oldest
sense was about crazy bullies killing people
for expressing the truths of their faith.
It's not crazy to seek help from a spiritual
or mental health counselor, or both, even
if the process can be as difficult a process
as hiring an attorney. Of course, that also
means choices, such as whether to stack both
attorney and therapist in favor of settlement
or litigation, or choosing one to offset another
can both have downsides, either eliminating
valuable perspectives or aggravating conflict.
Whew! The best that can be hoped for is to
unearth prejudices in the evaluation stage,
before getting burned. For example, going
to the press or Congress may well be inappropriate
for a particular whistleblower (or provoke
another round of retaliation). So may be
confronting an abusive/retaliatory boss,
or, conversely, appeasing him or her. And
of course patient confidentiality means that
asking a psychologist for other whistleblower
references may well lead nowhere. All these
decisions require thinking and talking-out.
A client can interview several, compare perspectives
and evaluate the differences.