Exactly. It's also probably relatively common for people to develop crushes on their therapists - since they are telling them their deepest secrets, and feeling that they have someone who understands. But if someone reveals to their therapist that they have feelings for them - it is the moral and legal responsibility of that therapist not to cross the line.
Of course they are allowed to have relationships - just not with their clients. People in these professions are not allowed to date their clients - end of story. To put it in perspective - lets say a teenage girl sets up a meeting to talk to her school counselor - and during that meeting the counselor tells her that he finds her attractive - and kisses her. Whether the kiss was welcome or not - this is ILLEGAL. Even if it was the girl who initiated it - ILLEGAL (because it's the counselor's job to stop it from happening). Even if the girl was 18 - ILLEGAL. The counselor is in a position of authority, and has no right to abuse that relationship. The law is there to protect people from being taken advantage of in that setting. Understand?
She wasn't charged because she kissed a teenager. She was charged because she was a counselor who kissed her client. She was in a position of authority when she did this, and this is illegal. Had she been counseling a 40 year old man and tried to pursue a romantic relationship with him - she still would have been found guilty of the same crime. This particular law is there for a reason - it keeps people like psychiatrists, therapists, school teachers, etc. from crossing boundaries and being inappropriate with clients. If a therapist or school teacher can't do their job without crossing these lines - then they need to be banned from the profession.
What she did WAS criminal, and it would have been just as criminal had she been counseling an adult. We're not really talking about "child abuse" here... what she was charged with specifically addresses the fact that she abused the client/counselor relationship - which is ILLEGAL. But the fact remains that he was a minor - and the worst thing that will happen to her as a result of this is that she won't be able to work with young boys again - which is as it should be.
I'm doubting that she will do any time, since she doesn't have a prior record. This case wasn't about seeing that this girl goes to jail- it was about making sure she can't work with young boys again, which seems more than appropriate..
There is definitely a reason why Amanda couldn't take the stand in her own defense, and the jury found her guilty because she broke the law. Had this been a male staff person and a female client, you all would be singing a different tune right now.
The issue at hand isn't the fact that he was a 16 year old boy and she was an adult. The problem with what she did - and what makes it illegal, is that she was indeed a youth counselor (whether licensed or not). This puts her in a position of authority. Four Oaks is also a program that is designed re-teach youth ages 8 to 18 how to trust adults and respect authority, which makes this even more sickening. When a person of authority, whether it be a counselor or school official, makes sexual advances towards someone they are caring for - it is morally and legally wrong. Had this same individual done this to a 40 year old man instead of a 16 year old boy, it still would have been illegal - because she is taking advantage of someone who is emotionally vulnerable and who has put faith and trust in that therapeutic relationship. To have a relatioship of this nature take that kind of turn is damaging.
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Ruckus