r. In many jurisdictions minors have the right to confidential communications from the age of twelve (Rinas & Jackson, 1988). Sandra may be within legal and ethical limits as a provider of expert testimony, however her action may seriously violate her relationship as Judy's counselor (Van Hoose & Kottler, 1985).
Judy's interests are the primary goal in this case. Whether she is of legal age regarding the holder of rights, is also important. Sandra needs to be clear that Judy is the client; she needs to includes Judy's wishes and desires regarding living arrangements and testimony. Testimony would still need to include ethical considerations such as areas of competence. Sandra may only qualify as an expert regarding Judy's observed behavior. Expertise regarding child development or homosexual patenting issues, needs to be determined. Use of the courtroom to facilitate social change, including consideration for the principle, is not an appropriate conce
...