 This is important to understand that at times the therapy is not only being given in individual setting but it is being given to a group. While talking about group therapy, psychologists describe an onset of the roles and responsibilities of all parties and limits to confidentiality. Like in the case of group therapy, the psychologist would not be concerned only with the stake of one individual but rather to all the group members because each individual is as important as every member of that group. So like whenever we are going to give the group therapy, we have to see the group dynamics as well. We have to see in which setting we are providing the therapy to the group and each individual will have the same stakes as the individual in a single individual. So we just cannot undermine the importance of group therapy over individual therapy. Rather in some cases, the group therapy is more influential than individual therapy, providing therapy to those served by others. Psychologists carefully consider treatment issues and the potential client's welfare to minimize the risk of confusion and conflict. Sometimes if the patient is already under treatment by another psychologist, for some reason, due to his relocation, his health issues or any other problem, in the case of death, he has to shuffle the client. We are giving him part in a new group therapy where the other members have already settled and a new member has come in. So we have to see if he has to face any conflicting situation just because he is becoming a new member to that. Or if he is in an uncomfortable situation, if he is facing any role conflict, or if he has prior learning experiences, if he is doing any hurdle with this learning experience. So we need to see if we should review this as well. If we include someone else's client in the group therapy, then what can be Then when we talk about the intimate relationship, we need to be very careful while we are looking into group therapy. For instance, when we are looking that the current clients are in process with us, we need to be very careful that not any kind of intimate relation may be developed between the psychologist and the client. Because while doing the therapy, this would be highly unethical to develop any kind of intimate relationship with the current client. Sexual intimacy with relatives of current therapy client is equally highly unethical as far as the client themselves are concerned, or the clients who are their past clients or their relatives, this is equally unethical for all of them. So psychologists do not engage in any kind of intimate relationship with the close relatives, guardians and significant others of current clients. Then intimate relation with former therapy client is also not allowed to be practiced as such. We can say that at least two years after the discontinuation of or cessation or termination of therapy and considering other important factors such as the nature and duration of treatment, the current mental state of the client and impact of the decision on clients. We have seen different movies which are being based on this very principle in which it is shown that therapeutic intervention is a long time relationship and at times personal infatuations or relationship development chances are there, so how can we carefully tackle this? And they are the different movies which address this issue and they provide the technical review over it that how can a therapist avoid getting himself into certain such conflicting situations. Then interruption of therapy, when entering into employment or contractual relationship, psychologists make reasonable efforts to provide for appropriate orderly resolution of responsibility for clients and patients and their care in event that employment on contractual relationships ends with paramount consideration given to the welfare of the client and patient. So you know this is very, very important that when we have to terminate his cessation, we have to keep the welfare of the client in front of him. At times we understand that this case may be going to give therapy for 15 weeks, but after 12 weeks you feel that there is no need. So there you can keep the welfare of the client in your mind, keep his cessation early. But in certain circumstances where you feel that you need to go beyond the 15th session and maybe it will take 20 and 22 session, the welfare of the client is not to try to save his fee, but to give him proper therapy, keep that session continued. However, the client may be taken in advance in confidence that we are doing this decision for his welfare. Then terminating the therapy prior to the termination, psychologists provide counseling to the clients and suggest alternate services as appropriate. Termination can be take place if it becomes clear that the client or the patient no longer needs the services and it is not likely to be benefited. Like Hum, a therapeutic intervention me assess that specific technique in which the therapist is expert is not benefiting the client. So we can suggest that we should do an appropriate reflux. Rather than looking at the client and have no benefit of that therapy. And then if the client or a person with whom the client has relationship, threaten the psychologist. So in other way round, if it is not going to be in the welfare of the psychologist or the relationship with the client, the psychologist is threatened by any means, he has or she has all the legal right to terminate the therapy and refer the client to some other person. So basically the termination of therapy involves the welfare of either the client or either the welfare of the psychologist. This is important that we have this decision appropriately. Soon after we are going to diagnose that therapy is not beneficial for anyone of the persons who are included into that formal contract of counseling and therapy.