Final answer:
The assertion that counselors' obligation regarding duty to warn varies by state is true. This duty entails preventing harm to the client or others and is a recognized principle in mental health professions. Landmark legal cases emphasize attorneys' responsibilities, highlighting the broader theme of professional accountability.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that counselors' obligation regarding duty to warn varies state-by-state is true. The duty to protect clients, which encompasses the duty to warn, is a principle recognized in mental health professions. This duty to protect may involve counselors taking necessary steps to prevent a client from harming themselves or someone else, or notifying a third party or the authorities if a threat of harm is perceived.
Two landmark cases mention different aspects of legal counsel obligations. In Strickland v. Washington, the case concerns the performance of legal counsel representing a defendant in criminal proceedings. It established that ineffective assistance of counsel must show both a deficiency in performance and that this deficiency affected the outcome. In contrast, Padilla v. Kentucky highlights the obligation of criminal defense attorneys to inform their clients about the risk of deportation associated with a conviction.
Neither case directly addresses the mental health counselors' duty to warn clients, but they underline the importance of professional responsibility in legal settings. Generally, the principle of a counselor's duty to warn and to protect is related to client welfare and safety in therapeutic contexts, rather than the rights of a criminal defendant.