Duley figured prominently in the story surrounding Ivins' death on July 29, apparently by his own hand. Shortly before he died, Duley testified in court during a hearing for a peace order against Ivins. At that time, she said he had threatened her and others and that she was desperately fearful of him. She also related that Ivins' psychiatrist had described the scientist as psychotic and capable of acting on his threats.

When Duley's actions were made public, some in the Frederick community responded negatively, questioning her motives and suggesting that she had violated the sacrosanct code of counselor/client confidentiality.

At that time, the FBI's case against Ivins had not been made public, and many who worked with him were totally incredulous that their friend and/or fellow employee could have committed the awful crimes for which he was a suspect. To them, Ivins was a kind, compassionate -- though somewhat sensitive --researcher and resident of Frederick . The accusations against Ivins, on top of his sudden death, were emotionally overwhelming to those who knew, liked and respected him.

It's not surprising, then, that some of Duley's actions were met with criticism. However, if what she reported about Ivins was true, her decision to alert authorities about his behavior was correct. The understandable fears she had for her own and others' safety trumped the counselor/client code of confidentiality.

This kind of confidentiality is required of other providers as well, including attorneys, physicians, and members of the clergy. Its purpose is a useful one, as it provides a framework in which those in difficulty can trust and confide in another individual. That sense of confidentiality encourages the distressed or troubled party to be honest and open, which is often the first and most important step in addressing the issue at hand.

But reason, ethics and the law agree that there are times and circumstances in which such confidentiality must be set aside. From what we know of the Ivins case at this point, it appears to have been one in which a trusted mental health provider breaking faith with a client was justified -- his guilt or innocence in the anthrax mailings aside.

This story has been a traumatic one for Frederick , USAMRIID and Ivins' friends, family and associates. It has also been a harrowing and trying experience for Duley. Because of her professional relationship with Ivins, she not only experienced anxiety and fear for her own and others' safety, but also was required to break a sacred contract with a client.

Some may continue to find fault with Duley's decision, but under the circumstances, there was little else she could do.