In defending against malpractice when sued by a former client, which statement best reflects confidentiality?

• A. The social worker's obligation to maintain complete confidentiality is waived when sued by a client.
• B. Confidentiality is never breached in any circumstance.
• C. All information must be disclosed to the court.
• D. The client must provide written consent to disclose anything.

Answer: (A)

The key idea here is that confidentiality isn’t absolute in the context of a malpractice defense. When a former client sues, the legal process creates a mechanism for access to information that is necessary to respond to the allegations. In practice, the social worker may disclose only information that is relevant to the defense and needed to protect the professional's rights, often under court orders or legal privilege rules, while still trying to minimize unnecessary exposure of client details. This means the confidentiality obligation is effectively relaxed for the purpose of defending oneself, though not a free-for-all disclosure.

So the statement that aligns with this reality is that the obligation to maintain complete confidentiality is waived when sued by a client. It reflects the idea that a legal defense permits limited, purposive disclosure to address the allegations, rather than requiring the social worker to reveal everything or to obtain client consent for any disclosure. The other options overstate or misconstrue how confidentiality works in litigation: confidentiality isn’t never breached, not all information must be disclosed to the court, and client consent isn’t always required when disclosures are necessary for a defense or court-ordered disclosure.