#2 psychology questions

1. Evaluate or give an example of an ethical resolution processes that pertain to conflicting organizational interests.

2. What are some ethical conflicts related to psychological assessment in forensic cases.

3. Determine actions that are ethically required when psychological assessment materials are misused

4. What mitigating factors can make resolving ethical issues difficult in clinical settings?

How can the APA Ethics Code and enforceable standards assist psychologists in resolving such issues? Ch 4

5. Can the APA Ethics Code assist psychologists in resolving ethical conflicts with conflicting organizational interests? Why or why not? Which interests should predominate when conflicting interests occur? Why? ch 4

6. How can a psychologist minimize the ethical issues related to conducting a forensic assessment? What actions do the APA Ethics Code require? What possible challenges could you encounter?

7. We are to take 'reasonable steps' to maintain ethics in the workplace.  See if you can think of some examples of reasonable steps for the following:

1. You are a psych intern at a major HMO organization in an outpatient psych department.  You see only children and adolescents.  One practitioner goes by the company rules and if the child (by no fault of their own) is late for appointments by 1-2 minutes every time.  The practitioner refuses to see that child because then he can spend that hour catching up on charting of his other clients.

2. You are a psych intern at a rural mental health clinic with two psychologists to supervise you.  One of the psychologists does not like to teach so won't supervise you.  The other psychologist that does supervise you constantly 'name drops' some of his local celebrity clients issues without it really being a teaching moment.

3. You are a new psychologist in a midtown practice.  You specialize in eating disorders.  One of the other practitioners refuses to refer eating disordered clients to you because they want the income from them.

4. You are in a PhD practicum and it is the expectation of the site that as an intern you go pick up your child clients, see them in the office, and then return them home in your personal car.  "It's the way we do things here" is the answer as to why it is done this way.

Class: what could you do in each case?

4. How can psychologist provide ethical information to courts give an example

The ethical issues reviewed include the role of the psychologist as an expert witness, matters of competence, informed consent, confidentiality, multiple relationships, and special issues related to billing. Emphasis is placed on how psychologists can provide useful information to the courts in a manner consistent with the American Psychological Association's (APA; 1992)

References

Knapp, S., & VandeCreek, L. (2001). Ethical Issues in Personality Assessment in Forensic Psychology. Journal Of Personality Assessment, 77(2), 242-254.

Notes ROLE OF THE EXPERT WITNESS

A psychologist may be involved in a forensic examination either as a court-appointed evaluator or as an employee of an attorney. When attorneys hire psychologists, their work falls trader the attorney—client privilege, and some courts have ruled that the attorneys may, after reviewing the reports or comments of the psychologists, choose not to reveal that information in court (Knapp, VandeCreek, & Fulero, 1993). However, when psychologists do appear in court, either as a court-appointed evaluator or an employee of one attorney, they typically assume the role of an expert witness.

The basic assumption of the Anglo American legal tradition is that truth is best obtained through an adversarial process by which two sides confront each other with facts, questions, information, and evidence. The legal system generates a verdict in which one side is found guilty/not guilty or liable/not liable, depending on the nature of the case. The adversarial role differs considerably from the psychotherapeutic role where reconciliation, agreement, and cooperation are the norm. Psychologists perform best as expert witnesses when they understand and accept the adversarial milieu of the courtroom setting. Although the exact rules vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, the general role is that expert witnesses provide information that is outside the expertise of the everyday layperson. That is, the typical judge or juror would not be expected to have the in-depth information on a specific topic that is obtained from the expert witness. The judge allows the experts to express opinions based on their knowledge of a particular issue or question. Traditional areas of expert testimony include medicine, engineering, finances, accounting, psychiatry, and psychology.

1. Is The Session Over Yet?

After 5 months, despite your efforts to remain objective and compassionate, you dread seeing this client. He refers to women, including his girlfriend, as "bitches." He burps constantly and has an annoying habit of scratching his forehead every few minutes. He also calls you by your first name, which you have not invited him to do. Your dislike for him is increased after every session despite the fact that he seems to be improving in the areas for which he sought counseling.

Did you let this fester for too long? Can you do anything to alter your negative feelings? Should you terminate him even though he still has many issues to explore? If so, how? Is it ethical to challenge his sexism when that issue is unrelated to his reasons for seeking counseling?

1. Why is this important? Depending on the disability, you may or may not be qualified to provide the testing.  It is important to think about these issues and address them up front when accepting an assignment.  

Whether a psychologist is admitted as an expert depends on the judge who reviews his or her education, training, and experience and how it relates to the specific question before the court. Opposing counsel can always object to the admission of the expert witness. However, the judge has the final decision on who is, or is not, an expert.

Psychologists disagree among themselves as to whether they should be allowed to testify concerning the ultimate question or issue before the presiding judge (e.g., Who should have custody of the child? Was the defendant insane at the time of the murder?). Again, whether a psychologist is allowed to testify on that issue depends on the presiding judge.

Regardless of whether psychologists do or do not testify on the ultimate question, the Ethics Code requires that psychologists base their conclusions from the forensic assessments and their recommendations “on information and techniques (including personal interviews of the individual, when appropriate) sufficient to provide appropriate substantiation for the findings” (Standard 7.02, p. 14, APA, 1992). The Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in Divorce Proceedings (APA, 1994) go even further and state that “the psychologist uses multiple methods of data gathering” (p. 679). It is vital that expert witnesses present accurate and precise information to the court. There are many complex issues before the court that do not have simple answers. For example, there have been some noticeable improvements over the years in the ability of psychologists and other mental health professionals to predict violence. Nonetheless, the best model for predicting violence is analogous to a meteorological prediction in which the probability of violence is reported; not a prediction presented in absolute terms (Monahan & Steadman, 1996).

The requirement for accuracy also means that psychologists should provide written or oral reports “of the psychological characteristics of an individual only after they have conducted an examination of the individual adequate to support their statements or conclusions” (APA, Standard 7.02(b), p. 14, 1992). Similarly, psychologists should refrain from making professional statements about persons whom they have not personally evaluated.

5. What are some ethics and professional issues related to the practice of social justice in counseling

Ethics and Professional Issues Related to the Practice of Social Justice in Counseling Psychology Next Chapter

Rebecca L. Toporek & Robert A. Williams

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Show Hide Page Numbers

On This Page

Download PDF

• Citations

• Add to My List

• Share

• Text Size

Citations

Format:

Toporek, R. & Williams, R. (2006). Ethics and professional issues related to the practice of social justice in counseling psychology. In R. L. ToporekL. H. Gerstein & N. A. Fouad Handbook for social justice in counseling psychology: Leadership, vision, and action (pp. 17-34). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd. doi: 10.4135/9781412976220.n2

Toporek, Rebecca L. and Robert A. Williams. "Ethics and Professional Issues Related to the Practice of Social Justice in Counseling Psychology." In Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action, 17-34. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2006. doi: 10.4135/9781412976220.n2.

Toporek, R & Williams, R 2006, 'Ethics and professional issues related to the practice of social justice in counseling psychology', in Handbook for social justice in counseling psychology: leadership, vision, and action, SAGE Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 17-34, viewed 20 March 2017, doi: 10.4135/9781412976220.n2.

Toporek, Rebecca L. and Robert A. Williams. "Ethics and Professional Issues Related to the Practice of Social Justice in Counseling Psychology." Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action. Rebecca L. ToporekLawrence H. Gerstein and Nadya A. Fouad. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2006. 17-34. SAGE Knowledge. Web. 20 Mar. 2017.

To copy, highlight above text and hit Ctrl-C.

Export: Export

Cancel

Have you created a personal profile? Login or create a profile above so that you can save clips, playlists, and searches.

Login/Register

Email

*Recipient's Email Address:

*Your Email:

*Your Name:

*Subject:

Message:

Send Me A Copy

Share

Cancel

Font Size

[Page 17]

Ethics and Professional Issues Related to the Practice of Social Justice in Counseling Psychology

Ethics and professional issues related to the practice of social justice in counseling psychology

Psychologists respect and protect civil and human rights and the central importance of freedom of inquiry and expression in research, teaching, and publication. They strive to help the public in developing informed judgments and choices concerning human behavior. In doing so, they perform many roles, such as researcher, educator, diagnostician, therapist, supervisor, consultant, administrator, social interventionist, and expert witness. (American Psychological Association [APA], 2002)

This statement, taken from the Preamble of the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (APA, 2002), hereafter referred to as the “APA Code,” identifies a range of professional roles and responsibilities of psychologists. Many of the roles noted in this statement are reasonable avenues that, when practiced from a place of ethics and accountability, can contribute significantly to the elimination of injustice, inequity, and bias.

There have been calls for a clearer and more consistent social justice presence in counseling psychology (Carter, 2003; Fouad et al., 2004; Ratts, D'Andrea, & Arredondo, 2004). This Handbook is designed to provide readers with the opportunity to see the wide range of roles, social issues, and projects through which counseling [Page 18]psychologists are contributing to social justice. The first chapter (Fouad, Gerstein, & Toporek) provides historical and conceptual underpinnings for the topics and approaches contained throughout the book. As discussed in that chapter, social justice has fluctuated in its acceptance within the profession of counseling psychology. Given this fluctuation, attention to ethics and ethical issues particular to situations involving counseling psychologists and social justice has been scarce. A more explicit discussion of ethics is necessary for a thoughtful and intentional base for social justice in practice, training, and research.

The intent of this chapter is to examine existing ethics documents for their potential to provide guidance and support for social justice work. Our primary focus will be on the APA Code (2002). However, we will also draw upon language and content presented in the ethics codes of other disciplines and specialties that historically have maintained social justice as a central tenet. In the second part of the chapter, we highlight ethical issues that may arise when working toward social justice and provide a case example demonstrating how a psychologist might attend to these issues. Finally, we provide recommendations regarding future development of ethical guidelines for social justice.

Working Definitions of Social Justice

With the renewed emphasis on social justice in counseling psychology, there is a need for a shared understanding of definitions and constructs. Two particular resources anchor our discussion. First, the Social Justice and Ethics Social Action Group that convened at the National Counseling Psychology Conference (Houston, 2001) established the following working definition of “social justice”:

A concept that advocates engaging individuals as coparticipants in decisions which directly affect their lives; it involves taking some action, and educating individuals in order to open possibilities, and to act with value and respect for individuals and their group identities, considering power differentials in all areas of counseling practice and research. (Blustein, Elman, & Gerstein, 2001, p. 9)

Second, Toporek and Liu (2001) distinguished between the related concepts of advocacy, empowerment, social action, and social justice, and they helped to define the construct of social justice within the framework of the counseling profession. They described a model using client advocacy as a unifying construct with empowerment on one end of a continuum and social action on the other. Toporek and Liu provided the following definition for advocacy.

[Advocacy is] action a mental health professional, counselor, or psychologist takes in assisting clients and client groups to achieve therapy goals through participating in clients' environments. Advocacy may be seen as an array of roles that counseling professionals adopt in the interest of clients, including empowerment, advocacy, and social action. (p. 387)

[Page 19]

Empowerment was described as action taken with a client to facilitate his or her ability to act in the face of oppression, whereas social action was described as action taken by the counselor, external to the client, to confront or act on behalf of client groups (Toporek & Liu, 2001). These definitions, and the definition of social justice provided by the Social Justice Ethics Work Group of the Houston conference, provide anchors for our examination of the relevance and utility of existing ethical codes.

Ethical Codes and Guidelines

Ethics codes, guidelines, and decision-making models serve as tools for ethical behavior. Within the APA Code (2002), the language that addresses social justice most clearly may be found in the Preamble and Principles. It is important to note that the Preamble and General Principles are “aspirational goals to guide psychologists toward the highest ideals of psychology. Although the Preamble and General Principles are not themselves enforceable rules, they should be considered by psychologists in arriving at an ethical course of action” (p. 1061). As aspirational guidelines, these have the potential to facilitate decision making regarding issues that arise in the course of social action.

In our review of the APA Code (2002), as well as the Canadian Code of Ethics for Psychologists (Canadian Psychological Association [CPA], 2000), the Association of Black Psychologists's Ethical Standards of Black Psychologists (Akbar & Nobles, 2002), the Feminist Therapy Ethical Code (Feminist Therapy Institute [FTI], 1999), and the National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics (National Association of Social Workers [NASW], 1999), three recurring constructs seemed relevant for ethical practice in social justice: respect, responsibility, and action. We will organize our examination of the ethical codes around these three themes, with particular attention to the APA Code. Within each section, we will also note criticisms that have been voiced and draw upon other ethical codes for guidance.

Respect

Respect for the integrity and strength of affected communities and clients is the core of any kind of work aimed at improving the conditions of oppressed groups. The APA Code (2002), Principle E, Respect for People's Rights and Dignity, asserts that it is imperative to respect cultural differences and take these into consideration when working with ethnic groups. Although this is laudable, clearer guidelines are needed regarding how this respect may be operationalized—for example, utilizing respect and awareness of a community's values and mores as determining forces in engaging in social justice interventions. A useful guideline for psychologists who are engaged in community work can be found in the CPA Code (2000), which states that psychologists must “acquire an adequate knowledge of the culture, social structure, and customs of a community before beginning any major work there” (Respect for [Page 20]Society, Paragraph 1). This is strengthened by the assertion that psychologists must “convey respect for and abide by prevailing community mores, social customs, and cultural expectations in their scientific and professional activities” (Respect for Society, Paragraph 2). The inclusion of the need to “abide” by the community and cultural mores helps to secure the position of the community as a driving force in the intervention.

The Ethical Standards of Black Psychologists goes even further in its ethical standards, stressing that Black psychologists are expected to “give deference to the will and intent of Black people” (Akbar & Nobles, 2002, p. 8). This strengths-based perspective conveys the assumption that the intent of Black people and human beings is inherently toward growth rather than destruction. This is articulated with regard to research in the statement, “This research should be reflective of the psychological strengths of Black people and/or should be focused on the cultivation of strengths which will foster such improvement” (Akbar & Nobles, 2002, p. 7). This high level of respect is commensurate with the responsibility and political implications of one's role as psychologist of a given age, race, ethnicity, social class, gender, sexual orientation, and disability status.

Respect thus lays a foundation for social justice work by ensuring that the psychologist understands and abides by the community's strengths, goals, and determination.

Responsibility

In our reading of ethical codes, three issues seemed to reflect a construct we identified as “responsibility”: ensuring equal access to psychology, minimizing the effects of bias and discrimination, and serving oppressed communities. First, the APA Code (2002), Principle D, Justice, states, “Psychologists recognize that fairness and justice entitle all persons to access to and benefit from the contributions of psychology and to equal quality in the processes, procedures, and services being conducted by psychologists” (p. 1062). This statement may be interpreted as a suggestion that the expertise held by psychologists should be shared with all who can benefit. The difficulty, however, lies in the condition that systemic injustice may hinder equal access and quality of care. There is a need for clearer directives regarding the role that psychologists might have in eradicating the injustice that limits access to services.

The second ethical issue related to responsibility is that of bias. Principle D, Justice, of the APA Code (2002) states, “Psychologists exercise reasonable judgment and take precautions to ensure that their potential biases, the boundaries of their competence, and the limitations of their expertise do not lead to or condone unjust practices” (pp. 1062–1063). In addition, Principle G, Human Relations, clearly states that psychologists should not engage in discrimination and harassment. These statements take important steps in acknowledging the responsibility that counseling psychologists have to eliminate their own biases. However, it appears that the extent of the responsibility is directed toward the psychologist's own behavior. Notably, some authors (e.g., Brown, 1997) have charged that this approach is reactive and does not [Page 21]go far enough in asserting the need for psychologists to actively rectify discrimination and other forms of oppression. If counseling psychologists are committed to social justice, there is a need for clearer statements encouraging prevention of unjust practices as ethical behavior. One example of such language is seen in the NASW (1999) ethical code, which states that social workers “are sensitive to cultural and ethnic diversity and strive to end discrimination, oppression, poverty, and other forms of social injustice” (Paragraph 2).

The third area of responsibility may be described as an expectation that professionals actively serve members of oppressed groups and, in doing so, acknowledge the complexities of the group and oppressive circumstances. This ranges from direct statements, such as the responsibility of Black psychologists to return their expertise to the Black community (Akbar & Nobles, 2002), to statements asserting responsibility to serve marginalized or vulnerable groups. As an example of the latter type of statement, the CPA Code (2002) states,

Although psychologists have a responsibility to respect the dignity of all persons with whom they come in contact in their role as psychologists, the nature of their contract with society demands that their greatest responsibility be to those persons in the most vulnerable position. (Values Statement, Paragraph 3)

Similarly, Bowman (1991) asserted that not only should psychologists learn about the communities that they serve, but they should be a part of the development of “special safeguards” in research to ensure that “vulnerable race and class groups are not systematically selected because of their compromised position, their open vulnerability, and their manipulability” (p. 753). Such a stance conveys both respect and responsibility for both the individuals and the communities that are being served. Although the APA Code (2002), Principle E: Respect for People's Rights and Dignity, refers to “special safeguards,” it appears that this was written specifically to “protect the rights and welfare of persons or communities whose vulnerabilities impair autonomous decision making” (p. 1063), and it is uncertain whether this is meant to generalize to populations who are not “impaired.”

Responsibility has been described as having a duty to serve oppressed groups, eliminate oppression, and make efforts to be conscientious in how one engages and intervenes within a community. Respect and responsibility lead to the third area of ethical practice, social action.

Social Action