Consequently, the potential benefits of increased access to counseling through TADC must be weighed carefully against the potential risks for unauthorized access to confidential counseling subject matter.
As with TADC, however, TADS is not without liabilities.
The inability of distance supervisors to physically assist their supervisees in a crisis response is considered by some critics to be unacceptable, and as with TADC, the practice of TADS challenges traditional beliefs about the importance of immediate physical proximity between participants in a clinical relationship.
Finally, both ACA (2005) and NBCC (2005) have published ethical guidelines for TADC practice.
For TADC and TADS separately, we then asked them (a) to describe additional regulations (if any) that were not currently displayed on the website, (b) to describe new regulations (if any) that had been approved by the board but that had not yet been enacted into law, (c) to describe new regulations (if any) that were currently under consideration by the board, and (d) to elaborate generally on the board's expressed views regarding the legitimacy of TADP and the degree to which it has or will become a priority for board consideration.
From the table, it can be seen that less than a third of the participants' states had existing regulations in place for TADC, and only 13% had regulations in place for TADS.
The remaining majority favored greater levels of independent regulation, viewing TADC and TADS to be specialty areas that are clearly distinct from traditional counseling and supervision practices, respectively.
A majority of boards (60%) supported conditional authorization, restricting TADC to situations in which distance or other hardships would prevent service delivery through traditional means (e.g., geographical isolation, physical inability to travel, unavailability of qualified providers of needed clinical service) and TADS to a limited percentage of total supervision requirements.
In states where TADP was permitted, current and proposed regulations ranged from a broad requirement to meet legal requirements of any jurisdiction in which an electronic presence is maintained (40%) to more specific standards requiring licensure in each state where TADC is practiced (60%).
Specifically, only one had enacted a formal requirement for preservice training specific to TADC practice; it required advance board approval of all such training without specifying minimal standards for its content and method of delivery.
Nevertheless, boards favoring more regulation were among the minority in this study, with only two boards requiring consumers to complete a separate informed consent form for TADC prior to engaging in it.