m1-psy 570

help

The Final Project for this course is the creation of a case study analysis. Review the

Final Project Guidelines and Rubric PDF

document, paying particular attention to the Prompt section (which is a detailed list of requirements for your final project), as well as the Milestone section (which provides an overview of each of the milestones in this course). Although the milestones support your successful completion of the final project, note that these assignments are not full drafts of the elements in the final project prompt, so although you will be working on different skills and aspects of your final project during the term, you will need to complete all elements of your case study analysis for submission in Module Nine.
To begin your work on this project, select a case study vignette for your final project from the

Case Study Vignette Directory PDF

document.

 

Identify the title of your chosen case study vignette in your discussion post title. Explain why you chose this particular case study vignette, and identify the central ethical conflict evident in the case study.
When responding to at least two of your peers, share your thoughts on their identified central ethical conflict. Do you agree or disagree? Explain your reasoning.
To complete this assignment, review the

Milestone One Guidelines and Rubric PDF

 document.

Peer1-SM

            For my project, I chose the case study 15-14 At the Farnsworth. In this case, a school counselor overhears some of the teaching staff in the lounge, gossiping about information that can be found in the student’s cumulative school record. The school counselor, instead of confronting the teachers about the confidentiality of those records, chooses to no longer put her notes in the students’ files. According to the textbook, record entries need to be balanced with utility and the “need to know”. I believe that the counselor’s reaction is an example of too much risk management and she could be hurting the children and jeopardizing the school/staff/other children by withholding specific information.

 

References:

Koocher, G. P, & Keith-Spiegel, P. (2016).
Ethics in Psychology and the Mental Health Professions (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Peer2-JN

I am choosing the Case 14-13: Daze Fluster because I feel like as a college student I can relate to the students in the case. My job right now as well is a 1 to 1 Paraprofessional where I follow a visually impaired student from class to class and help him out. Sometimes in my own classes in college not all my professors were ready or prepared and spent too much time on other topics or just fiddling around. I have found too that in the high school lots of teachers slide by the seat of their pants when it comes to day-to-day lessons.

 

The central ethical dilemma in this case on Daze Fluster is that each class he proves to be not prepared or organized to teach the class. This shows his lack of being able to be professional or stand by his ethical responsibilities to the students.

PSY 570 Case Vignette Directory

From the course textbook, Ethics in Psychology and the Mental Health Professions: Standards
and Cases (4th edition).

Chapter and Case Page

Chapter 1
Case 1-28 Skid Greenspace, MSW

Page 15

Chapter 2
Case 2-2 Carl Klutzkind, PhD

Page 22

Case 2-3 Sarah Bellum, EdD Page 22

Chapter 9
Case 9-3 A Young Asian

Page 278

Case 9-50 After an affair Page 302

Chapter 10
Case 10-53 Zena Freeman

Page 341

Chapter 13
Case 13-4 Dahlia Discord, MSW

Page 434

Case 13-7 Billy Berzerk Page 436

Case 13-9 Helena Scruples Page 438

Case 13-10 Herman Beastly Page 438

Case 13-13 Jack Balance, M.D. Page 441

Case 13-19 Windy Fluffball, JD, PhD Page 445

Chapter 14
Case 14-4 Two students

Page 462

Case 14-13 Professor Daze Fluster Page 466

Case 14-23 Professor Ablation Page 470

Case 14-37 Bonnie Bruised Page 477

Case 14-42 After Pam Sincere Page 480

Case 14-49 Clinton Clever Page 483

Chapter 15
Case 15-14 At the Farnsworth

Page 505

Chapter 16
Case 16-16 Nancy Icarus

Page 535

Chapter 18
Case 18-5 Mary Tripped-Up, PhD

Page 615

1

PSY 570 Final Project Guidelines and Rubric

Overview

The final project for this course is the creation of a case study analysis. The final project represents an authentic demonstration of competency. This competency
is shown by the development of specific skill sets including: case study identification, understanding ethical conflict in a psychology-related work settings,
increased knowledge in the origin and rationale for ethics orientation in the psychology profession, specific knowledge of the core ethical principles that govern
professional behavior, an overview of specific standards as they apply to sub-specialties in psychology, a practical model for ethical decision making, and
consideration of alternative decision-making models. The project is divided into four milestones, which will be submitted at various points throughout the
course to scaffold learning and ensure quality final submissions. These milestones will be submitted in Modules Two, Three, Five, and Seven. The final project
will be submitted in Module Nine.

By understanding the ethical principles of the psychology profession, you will learn how to inform your decision making when it comes to protecting and serving
the populations we serve. It is also important that the contemporary psychologist be able to address issues that are unique to our time. Some of these
challenges ask us to reconsider ethical frameworks and to be more precise in the language we use to define ethical decision making. This course allows you to
explore and apply important ethical concepts to potential situations. These skills are essential for proper behavior in the psychology profession.
This assessment addresses the following course outcomes:

• Assess the impact of the current and emerging ethical codes on the practice of psychology for their influence in developing ethical decision-making
strategies

• Assess the influence of culture and social orientations on the development and practice of ethical standards of conduct for consideration when
developing ethical strategies

• Distinguish between ethically supported and ethically unsupported strategies for resolving ethical dilemmas in practice
• Develop strategies for incorporating empathy for diverse perspectives into ethically responsible practices

• Develop strategies for evaluating and resolving ethical dilemmas that integrate ethical decision-making models

Prompt

The summative assignment for this course is a case study analysis. The case study is one way for you to showcase the skill sets you have learned in this course
coupled with your area of professional interest. You will choose a case study from a pre-determined list. You should choose a case study that is relevant to your
concentration and/or a particular career field in which you are interested in working. You will utilize codes of ethics pertinent to your chosen area of interest in
psychology to approach this case study analysis. You will develop an ethical strategy for addressing the ethical issues present in your case study and analyze your
strategy for how it relates to important ethical concepts in psychology. Your case study choice, including the ethical conflict in the case study will be submitted
once for peer and instructor review, and then be resubmitted as a developing case study analysis following feedback that incorporates suggestions.

2

Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:

I. Introduction: For this part of the assessment, begin your case study analysis by examining the many factors that influence codes of ethics in psychology.
A. Summarize the chosen case study. Be sure to include the important people and key interactions in the case study. This will be used later in your

analysis.
B. Assess culture and social orientation and their influence on ethical behavior and the existing codes of conduct. Be sure to provide examples to

support your claims.
C. Assess how interactions between the important roles (client, psychologist, researcher, participant, etc.) in psychology are influenced by culture

and social orientation and how that influence informs ethical conduct in psychology.
D. When making ethical decisions in your chosen area of concentration, how would you go about deciding whether or not an ethical strategy is

supported or unsupported? In other words, what criteria should professionals in your selected concentration or area of interest use to
determine which opinions on ethics to consider in shaping their response to the particular situation?

E. How do contemporary problems impact the need for reconsidering supported opinions on ethics in your concentration or chosen area of
interest in psychology? Be sure to provide examples to support your claims.

II. Ethical Analysis: For this part of the assessment, use the Eight Step Ethical Decision Making Model to show how you would resolve the conflicts or
ethical issues in your case study.

A. Describe the ethical issues in your chosen ethical scenario and relate the issues to the important people identified previously. You might
consider the following: What are the questions you wish to answer and the ethical issue that must be addressed?

B. Develop an ethical strategy using an Eight Step analysis to address the ethical issues and which could be applied to the chosen scenario. Be sure
to explain how your ethical strategy follows supported ethical guidelines. You might consider the following: What series of steps would you take
to address the issue? What ethical principles and standards inform this strategy?

C. Assess how your strategy differs with an opposing ethical strategy that could be used to address this situation and justify why your strategy
would be more preferable. Be sure to explain whether or not the opposing strategy follows supported ethical guidelines. You might consider the
following: What other principles or standards could be implemented? What counter arguments may arise in response to your strategy? How
would you answer them?

D. Assess your strategy for how it addresses ethical problems associated with multiple role relationship issues. You might consider the following:
Does your strategy consider the appropriateness of the different relationships psychologists can have with clients?

E. Assess your strategy for how it addresses ethical problems associated with multicultural competence issues. You might consider the following:
Does your strategy consider issues of diversity and culture with regard to your chosen ethical issue?

F. Assess your strategy for your chosen ethical scenario for how it aligns with current and emerging ethical codes in your chosen area of interest on
the practice of psychology in your concentration or area of interest. You might consider the following: How does your strategy follow more
modern opinions on ethics? How does your strategy reflect that ethics in psychology is not stagnant?

III. Conclusion: For this part of the assessment, develop a conclusion explaining the different influences on your own strategy. Be sure to incorporate peer

and instructor feedback you have received in order to properly reflect on your strategy.

3

A. Explain the influence of culture and social orientation on the development of your ethical strategy. You might consider the following: What
cultural implications did you feel you had to consider when developing your strategy?

B. Explain the influence of diversity and equality on the development of your ethical strategy. You might consider the following: What issues of
diversity and equality were in the ethical scenario, and how were they addressed? How did this influence your thought process and decisions
while developing your ethical strategy?

C. Explain how controversial issues in ethics have shaped emerging ideas in ethics. Be sure to provide your thoughts on this and how the
development of your strategy was or was not influenced by controversial issues. You might consider the following: Did you follow a strictly
traditional model, or did you use a more modern approach? How did this influence your thought process and decisions while developing your
ethical strategy?

D. Explain how your strategy could be changed to further address issues of multiple role relationships and justify your claims. In what ways does
your strategy lack in its consideration of multiple role relationships?

E. Explain how your strategy could be changed to further address issues of multicultural competence and justify your claims. In what ways does
your strategy lack in its consideration of multicultural competence?

F. Develop a conclusion summarizing your ethical strategy and how you believe it could be implemented to solve the chosen ethical scenario.

Milestones
Milestone One: Case Study Selection
In Module One, you will select a case study in your area of interest to analyze for your final project, the Case Study Analysis. In the Case Study Selection
discussion, you will identify your selected case study, describe your interest in the case, and identify the central ethical conflict. This milestone will be graded
with the Milestone One Rubric.

Milestone Two: Case Study Analysis Outline
In Module Three, you will identify the ethical conflict in the case study and produce an outline of your final case study analysis using a template provided. You
addressed the first four elements (title page, case study abstract, detailed case study description, and ethical conflict) in Milestone One and will add more details
in this milestone. This milestone will be graded with the Milestone Two Rubric.

Milestone Three: Applying the APA Code of Ethics Five Principles and Exploring Ethical Standards
In Module Five, you will go back to your outline and explain the five general guiding ethical principles found within the APA Code of Ethics. This milestone will
be graded with the Milestone Three Rubric.

Milestone Four: The Ethical Decision-Making Process, Alternative Considerations, Diversity Issues, and Multiple role Relationships
In Module Seven, you will list the eight-step ethical decision-making model, discuss an alternative or opposing model of decision-making, and put your case
study conflict through the eight-step model. This milestone will be graded with the Milestone Four Rubric.

4

Final Submission: Case Study Analysis
In Module Nine, you will submit your final project. It should be a complete, polished artifact containing all of the critical elements of the final project. It should
incorporate feedback gained throughout the course. This submission will be graded with the Final Project Rubric.

Deliverables
Milestone Deliverable Module Due Grading

One Case Study Selection 2 Graded separately; Milestone One Rubric

Two Case Study Analysis Outline 3 Graded separately; Milestone Two Rubric
Three Applying the APA Code of Ethics 5 Graded separately; Milestone Three Rubric

Four The Ethical Decision-Making Process 7 Graded separately; Milestone Four Rubric
Final Project Submission: Case Study

Analysis
9 Graded separately; Final Project Rubric

Final Project Rubric

Guidelines for Submission: The case study analysis paper should be 8–10 pages, double-spaced, using 12-point Times New Roman font, one-inch margins, and
discipline-appropriate APA citations.

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Introduction:
Summary

Meets “Proficient” criteria and
uses industry-specific language
to establish expertise

Comprehensively summarizes
the chosen scenario, the
important people, and the
important interactions present
in the case study

Summarizes the chosen scenario,
the important people, and the
important interactions present in
the case study but is lacking in
detail or breadth

Does not summarize the
chosen scenario, the important
people, and the important
interactions present in the case
study

4

Introduction: Culture Meets “Proficient” criteria and
offers keen insight into the
influence of culture and social
orientation on ethical behavior

Assesses the influence of
culture and social orientation
on ethical behavior and
adherence to codes of conduct

Assesses the influence of culture
and social orientation on ethical
behavior and adherence to codes
of conduct but examination lacks
depth or detail

Does not assess the influence
of culture and social
orientation on ethical behavior
and adherence to codes of
conduct

6

Introduction:
Interactions

Meets “Proficient” criteria and
offers keen insight into the
interactions between
important roles in psychology

Assesses how interactions
between different roles in
psychology affects the cultural
development of ethical practice

Assesses how interactions
between different roles in
psychology affects the cultural
development of ethical practice
but examination lacks depth or
detail

Does not assess interactions
between different roles in
psychology affects the cultural
development of ethical practice

6

5

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Introduction:
Supported or
Unsupported

Meets “Proficient” criteria and
clearly articulates how the
opinions on ethics relate to the
area of interest

Distinguishes between
supported and unsupported
opinions on ethics for resolving
ethical dilemmas in area of
interest

Identifies supported and
unsupported opinions on ethics
for resolving ethical dilemmas in
area of interest but does not
differentiate between them

Does not distinguish supported
and unsupported opinions on
ethics for resolving ethical
dilemmas in area of interest

6

Introduction:
Contemporary

Problems

Meets “Proficient” criteria and
offers keen insight into the
impact of contemporary
problems on the
reconsideration of supported
opinions on ethics

Assesses the impact of
contemporary problems on the
reconsideration of supported
opinions on ethics in area of
interest

Assesses the impact of
contemporary problems
influencing the reconsideration of
supported opinions on ethics but
examination lacks depth or does
not connect to the area of
interest

Does not assess the impact of
contemporary problems
influencing the reconsideration
of supported opinions on ethics

6

Ethical Analysis:
Ethical Issues

Meets “Proficient” criteria and
described ethical issues
encompass a variety of types of
ethical dilemmas

Describes the ethical issues and
potential questions and how
the important people in the
case study relate to the ethical
issues

Describes the ethical issues and
potential questions and how the
important people in the case
study relate to the ethical issues
but description lacks depth or
detail

Does not describe the ethical
issues and potential questions
and the important people in
the case study

6

Ethical Analysis:
Ethical

Strategy

Meets “Proficient” criteria and
uses industry-specific language
to establish expertise

Develops an ethical strategy
using Eight Step analysis and
explains how the strategy
follows supported ethical
guidelines

Develops an ethical strategy but
does not use Eight Step analysis
or does not explain how it follows
supported ethical guidelines

Does not develop an ethical
strategy using Eight Step
analysis

6

Ethical Analysis:
Opposing Ethical

Strategy

Meets “Proficient” criteria and
justification acknowledges
counter arguments and the
relationship between the
arguments and strategy
presented

Justifies why developed
strategy is more preferable
than an opposing strategy

Explains how developed strategy
would be more preferable than
an opposing strategy but does
not justify claims

Does not explain how strategy
would be more preferable than
an opposing ethical strategy

6

Ethical Analysis:
Multiple role

Relationship Issues

Meets “Proficient” criteria and
offers keen insight into how the
strategy addresses issues with
multiple role relationships

Assesses strategy for how it
addresses ethical problems
associated with multiple role
relationships

Assesses strategy for how it
addresses ethical problems
associated with multiple role
relationships but examination
lacks depth or detail

Does not assess strategy for
how it addresses ethical
problems associated with
multiple role relationships

6

6

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Ethical Analysis:
Multicultural

Competence Issues

Meets “Proficient” criteria and
offers keen insight into how the
strategy addresses issues with
multicultural competence and
social awareness and
competence

Assesses strategy for how it
addresses ethical problems
associated with multicultural
competence and social
orientation awareness and
competence

Assesses strategy for how it
addresses ethical problems
associated with multicultural
competence but examination
lacks depth or detail

Does not assess strategy for
how it addresses ethical
problems associated with
multicultural competence

6

Ethical Analysis:
Codes

Meets “Proficient” criteria and
provides cogent reasoning with
regard to how current and
emerging ethical codes shape
ethical decision making in area
of interest

Assesses strategy for how it
aligns with current and
emerging ethical codes in area
of interest

Assesses strategy for how it aligns
with current and emerging ethical
codes in area of interest but
examination lacks depth or detail

Does not assess strategy for
how it aligns with current and
emerging ethical codes in area
of interest

6

Conclusion: Culture
and Social Orientation

Meets “Proficient” criteria and
provides cogent reasoning with
regard to the influence of
culture and social orientation
on ethical strategies

Explains the influence of
culture and social orientation
on the development of ethical
strategy

Explains the influence of culture
and social orientation on the
development of ethical strategy,
but discussion lacks detail or
depth

Does not explain the influence
of culture and social
orientation on the
development of ethical strategy

6

Conclusion: Diversity
and Equality

Meets “Proficient” criteria and
provides cogent reasoning with
regard to the influence of
diversity and equality on ethical
strategy

Explains the influence of
diversity and equality on the
development of ethical strategy

Explains the influence of diversity
and equality on the development
of ethical strategy but discussion
lacks detail or depth

Does not explain the influence
of diversity and equality on the
development of ethical strategy

6

Conclusion:
Controversial Issues

Meets “Proficient” criteria and
provides cogent reasoning with
regard to the influence of
controversial issues on the
development of ethical
strategies

Explains how ethical
controversies shape ethical
frameworks and how they
influenced or did not influence
development of strategy with
regard to emerging ideas in
ethics

Explains how ethical
controversies shape ethical
frameworks and how they
influenced or did not influence
development of strategy with
regard to emerging ideas in ethics
but lacks detail or depth

Does not explain how ethical
controversies shape ethical
frameworks and how they
influenced or did not influence
development of strategy with
regard to emerging ideas

6

Conclusion: Issues of
Multiple role
Relationships

Meets “Proficient” criteria and
clearly articulates elements of
strategy that are lacking

Justifies how your strategy
could be changed to further
address issues of multiple role
relationships

Explains how your strategy could
be changed to further address
issues of multiple role
relationships but does not justify
claims

Does not explain how your
strategy could be changed to
further address issues of
multiple role relationships

6

Conclusion: Issues of
Multicultural
Competence

Meets “Proficient” criteria and
clearly articulates elements of
strategy that are lacking

Justifies how strategy could be
changed to further address
issues of multicultural
competence

Explains how strategy could be
changed to further address issues
of multicultural competence but
does not justify claims

Does not explain how strategy
could be changed to further
address issues of multicultural
competence

6

7

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Conclusion:
Conclusion

Meets “Proficient” criteria and
uses industry-specific language
to establish expertise

Comprehensively summarizes
your ethical strategy and
discusses how it could be
implemented to address the
scenario

Summarizes ethical strategy and
discusses how it could be
implemented to address the
scenario, but is lacking in breadth
or detail

Does not provide a summary of
ethical strategy

4

Articulation of
Response

Submission is free of errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, and
organization and is presented
in a professional and easy to
read format with language that
is appropriate to the intended
audience

Submission has no major errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, organization or
audience-appropriate
terminology

Submission has major errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, organization, or
audience-appropriate language
that negatively impact readability
and articulation of main ideas

Submission has critical errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, organization,
or audience-specific language
that prevent understanding of
ideas

2

Total 100%

PSY 570 Final Project Milestone One Guidelines and Rubric

Prompt: In Milestone One, you will select a case study to analyze for your final project. For this assignment, review the Final Project Guidelines and Rubric
document in the Assignment Guidelines and Rubrics section of the course. Select a case study vignette for your final project from the Case Study Vignette
Directory to use for your final project.

Make sure to include the following critical elements:

• Identify a case study vignette and use that as the title for the initial post

• Justify reasons for your case study vignette selection and relate your choice back to chosen professional field of psychology

• Identify central ethical conflicts of selected case study and describe interactions between the different roles in the scenario

• Engage in the discussion topic and respond to at least two peers, sharing your thoughts on ethical conflicts

Guidelines for Submission: Share your choice as a discussion topic post by Thursday of Module One in the Case Study Vignette Selection discussion topic for
peer and instructor feedback. Identify the title of your chosen case study vignette in your discussion post title. Explain why you chose this particular case study
vignette and identify the central ethical conflict evident in the case study.

Go beyond your own case study and explore what your classmates have chosen for their final project. Respond to at least two of your peers by the end of
Module One and share your thoughts on their identified central ethical conflict. Do you agree or disagree? Explain your reasoning.

Rubric

Critical Elements Proficient (100%) Needs Improvement (85%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Case Study Vignette Identifies a case study vignette from the
Case Study Vignette handout and titles
post with the case study vignette title

Identifies a case study vignette from the
Case Study Vignette handout but does
not title post with the case study
vignette title

Does not identify a case study vignette
from the Case Study Vignette handout

20

Justification of Selection Justifies reasons for selecting case study
vignette and relates choice back to
chosen professional field of psychology

Explains reasons for selecting case study
vignette but does not relate choice back
to chosen professional field of
psychology

Does not explain reasons for selecting
case study vignette

20

Identification of Ethical
Conflict and Interactions

Identifies central ethical conflict of case
study and describes interactions
between different roles in the scenario

Identifies central ethical conflict of case
study but does not assess interactions
between different roles in the scenario

Does not identify central ethical conflict
of case study

20

Engagement Responds to at least two peers and
shares thoughts on ethical conflicts

Responds to one peer and shares
thoughts on ethical conflicts

Does not respond to any peers 20

Critical Elements Proficient (100%) Needs Improvement (85%) Not Evident (0%) Value

APA Writing Few errors related to APA style and
citations

Some errors related to APA style and
citations

Major errors related to APA style and
citations

10

Articulation of Response Submission is free of errors related to
grammar, spelling, syntax, and
organization and is presented in a
professional and easy to read format
with language that is appropriate to the
intended audience

Submission has no major errors related
to grammar, spelling, syntax,
organization or audience-appropriate
terminology

Submission has critical errors related to
grammar, spelling, syntax, organization,
or audience-specific language that
prevent understanding of ideas

10

Total 100%

Chapter 1

Case 1-28 Skid Greenspace, MSW-Page 15

Case 1–28: Skid Greenspace, L.M.F.T., prided himself on recycling anything before disposing of it. Mr. Greenspace was chagrined when a client showed him the scratch paper he left in the waiting room for children to draw on. It had confidential client treatment notes on the back.

Chapter 2

Case 2-2 Carl Klutzkind, PhD-Page 22

Case 2–2: Carl Klutzkind, Ph.D., treated a woman with many adjustment problems in the wake of a separation and impending divorce. After Dr. Klutzkind had worked with the client for 6 months, her attorney asked whether he would testify in support of her having custody of her 7-year-old child. Despite having no forensic train-ing or experience, Dr. Klutzkind agreed and from the witness stand offered many opinions about the adjustment of the woman and her child. The client’s husband filed an ethical complaint against Klutzkind, noting that he lacked any training in child work, that he never actually interviewed the child, and that he was therefore negligent in offering an opinion. It seems that the child had been in treatment with another psychologist, and Klutzkind never sought information from that colleague or the child’s father.

Case 2-3 Sarah Bellum, Psy.D., completed her graduate training in the 1980s, before clinical neuropsychology evolved as a distinct specialty. She was trained to “assess organicity” using the first edition of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS), House-Tree-Person drawings, and the Bender Motor Gestalt Test. She has never studied neuroanatomy and has no knowledge of newer assessment tools designed for use in neuropsychological assessment. Her current practice focuses chiefly on psychotherapy. An attorney contacted Dr. Bellum about assessing a client who had suffered a closed head injury and was experiencing language, memory, and perceptual sequella. She accepted the referral and tested the client using the “tried-and-true” techniques she learned decades earlier.

Chapter 9

Case 9-3 A Young Asian-Page 278

Case 9–3: A young Asian client saw herself
as homely and unlikable. Letme Fixit, Ph.D., explained how he was only trying to boost her self-esteem when he told her she had beautiful eyes and how he could imagine her having a close relationship with a “white man” like him, even though it could not be him as much as he would like that. His attempts to exonerate himself on the grounds that he went overboard trying to con-vince the client that she was attractive were not persuasive to a licensing board.
Dr. Fixit may have meant well in his own
mind; however, his actions illustrate insensitiv-ities and cultural bias. He focused on physical attributes of the client and clearly asserted white privilege with an implication that attraction to people of Asian ancestry holds less value. Most therapists would not attempt to alter a client’s self-perceptions without first attempting to understand the basis for the feelings.

Case 9-50 After an affair-Page 302

Case 9–50: After an affair between Gary Goferit, Ph.D., and Paula Jettison had ended, Jettison filed charges against Goferit for sexual harassment and exploitation. She also contacted the local newspapers. She was joined by several other students, who claimed they, also, had experienced the same abuse by Goferit. Dr. Goferit lost his job and his wife. The contemporary popular press relishes stories like this, and even sophisticated academic publications, such as the Chronicle of Higher Education, feature them. We collected dozens of articles from the media, several involving mental health and social science educators, from which to adapt our cases. Students also take far greater risks than they may appreciate. At the time, some may see their relationship with professors as exciting, possibly even as putting them on the fast rungs up the career ladder, only to later find themselves dis-carded and frozen out.

Chapter 10

Case 10-53 Zena Freeman-Page 341

Case 10–53: When Zena Freeman asked Macho Mann, Ph.D., for assistance with problems she was having understanding certain concepts in her organizational psychology class, he commented that women did not belong in the course because they were not suited to the field. Mann refused to respond to her specific questions. Instead, he continued to refer to the general unsuitability of women for work in the business world and cited her difficulties in comprehension as evidence. This case does not involve direct sexual references or touching, but the effect was to keep the woman in a subordinate position through exclusion or ridicule. This also seems to be an example of how faculty members and super-visors can exploit their power over students (Carr, 1991). The next two cases illustrate the need for
ethical sensitivity to professional interactions in the workplace regardless of how one defines and interprets sexual or gender harassment. The first incident came to our attention from a middle-aged supervisor, who concluded ultimately that her trainee must be gay, never recognizing that her own behavior might well be unwelcome to any young man.

Chapter 13

Case 13-4 Dahlia Discord, MSW-Page 434

Case 13–4: Dahlia Discord, M.S.W., has been treating Melissa Malfunction for anxiety and mild depression in the aftermath of an automobile accident. Ms. Malfunction has been out of work for 3 months and receives disability insurance payments. The insurer has scheduled her for a disability case review, and Ms. Malfunction has asked Ms. Discord to complete a disability evaluation form and possibly testify as an expert in support of her claim before an administrative law judge. Ms. Discord would like to support her psychotherapy client but is not certain that she can objectively support Ms. Malfunction’s claim that she is totally unable to work at any job for emotional reasons.
Psychotherapists are often asked to write letters of various sorts in support of their clients but must take care not to compromise their professional integrity. Ms. Discord should not allow herself to be manipulated into making a recommendation or evaluative statement that she cannot,
in good conscience, support. At the same time, she does not want to disrupt the rapport with her client. One possible solution would involve advising Ms. Malfunction that, although she cares deeply about her welfare, Ms. Discord cannot take on the role of an independent evaluator to determine disability. Ms. Discord could also agree to write a letter, with the client’s consent, documenting her work with Ms. Malfunction, the symptoms reported by the client, her diagnostic impressions, an estimate of the level of symptom severity, and other treatment information. However, the letter should include only accurate information and should avoid commenting specifically on Ms. Malfunction’s ability to work or qualification for disability. Those recommendations should be left to other mental health experts who do not have preexisting or ongoing therapeutic relationships with her.

Case 13-7 Billy Berzerk-Page 436

Case 13–7: Billy Bezerk was to stand trial for the axe murder of his family of four. His attorney was planning to use an insanity defense and hired Cruddy D. Cider, Psy.D., to conduct an expert psy-chological evaluation of criminal responsibility.

Case 13-9 Helena Scruples-Page 438

Case 13–9: Helena Scruples, Ph.D., has considerable knowledge regarding eyewitness identification. Her own research shows the frequent unreliability of such identifications. When asked to serve as an expert witness by the defense in a rape case, Dr. Scruples feels sympathetic to the female victim and knows that prosecution of alleged perpetrators is difficult. If she agrees to help the defense, she ma

Case 13-10 Herman Beastly Page 438

Case 13–10: Herman Beastly is accused of raping and murdering an adolescent babysitter. Evidence strongly indicates that he is guilty and may meet criteria for a death sentence based on a state law that permits capital punishment for criminals likely to commit repeated violent crimes of this sort. John Qualm, M.D., considered an expert on the prediction of dangerousness, has published reports that highlight the difficulty in making such predictions reliably. He is asked to testify by the defense in the hope that his opinions may save Beastly from execution

Case 13-13 Jack Balance, M.D. Page 441

Case 13–13: Jack Balance, M.D., undertook a child custody evaluation at the request of the attorney representing the child’s father. The attorney advised Dr. Balance that both parents were interested in cooperating with the evaluation. Balance met with the father and the child for assessment purposes, but the mother subsequently declined to participate. At the trial, Dr. Balance testified only with respect to the child–father relationship, but the mother’s attorney attempted to discredit him as an expert because he had not interviewed the child’s mother.
Dr. Balance would have been better advised
to confirm in advance the willingness of all parties to cooperate. He might have accomplished this through personal contact or by court order, if necessary. He certainly behaved ethically in commenting only on his actual contacts (i.e., the adequacy of the child–father relationship), while refraining from any comments about the parent who declined to participate. In addition, Dr. Balance had to pay special attention to note the limitations, based on incomplete data, of any recommendations he might make. The attempt to discredit his testimony is unfortunate, but he did not commit an ethical violation.

Case 13-19 Windy Fluffball, JD, PhD Page 445

Case 13–19: Windy Fluffball, J.D., Ph.D., agreed to serve as an expert witness in a civil lawsuit that involved alleged wrongful termination of a clinical psychology graduate student from a doctoral program. Dr. Fluffball expounded on his years of teaching and membership on the National Psychological Society’s Education and Training Oversight Committee. On cross-examination, Fluffball was forced to admit that his doctorate was in physiological psychology, that he never had clinical training, that he never worked or taught in a clinical psychology program, that he was not licensed as a psychologist, and although he had recently won appointment to the Education and Training Oversight Committee of his professional association, he had yet to attend a single meeting. After the jury returned a verdict favoring the other side, the lawyers were allowed to poll the jurors and discovered that Dr. Fluffball’s testimony was given very little weight. One must wonder whether the side for which he testified would have fared better using a witness who did less to inflate his qualifications.
MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS AS DEFENDANTS
Rather than simply focus on mental health malpractice, it seems more reasonable to think of the broader concept of professional liability as applying to all of one’s professional service delivery activities. In a legal sense, there are four elements that must be present before a successful civil liability lawsuit is possible. Think of them as the four Ds: duty, dereliction, direct causation, and damages. First, the clinician must have a professional relationship with the party in question. That is, a practitioner–client relationship must have existed with a resulting duty to the client. Second, there must be some negligence or dereliction of that duty on the part of the therapist. Third, some harm must have accrued to the client as a direct result of the negligence or dereliction of the duty. Finally, a causal relationship between the negligence and the resulting damages must be shown (Bennett et al., 2007; Bucky et al., 2005; Caudill, Sparta, & Koocher, 2006; Falender & Shafranske, 2004; Knapp et al., 2013). Needless to say, by this definition a successful prosecution for malpractice would necessarily mean that the clinician had behaved unethically by virtue of negligence. Read the next three cases with these standards in mind and see whether you can hazard a guess about the outcomes.

Chapter 14

Case 14-4 Two students-Page 462

Case 14–4: Two students sought monetary damages because a course proved too difficult. The judge in small claims court ruled that the professor was guilty of educational malpractice for making an entry-level course too demanding (Shea, 1994).

Case 14-13 Professor Daze Fluster Page 466

Case 14–13: Students complained to the department chair about Professor Daze Fluster regard-ing the quality of Fluster’s classes. The students claimed that he often arrived late, spent time flipping through a tangled mass of papers in his briefcase, had no readily apparent agenda for each class session, and spoke in an unconnected fashion. The students asserted that their time and tuition were not being well spent.

Case 14-23 Professor Ablation Page 470

Case 14–23: Professor Ablation showed a video in his undergraduate neuropsychology class demonstrating vivid depictions of brain surgery techniques on a puppy and a cat. Two students fled the room in tears, and many others became visibly distressed. When one student asked Professor Ablation why he had not given them some warning, he replied, “You’re supposed to attend every class. This is a course about the brain, after all.” Images evoke powerful emotions. Having sat
through multiple previous showings, instrutors may lose touch with the reactions some students will have to seeing visual depictions for the first time. Students seem to be more squeamish or more open than students from much earlier decades in expressing distress when shown videos or demonstrations that involve animal experimentation (Herzog, 1990). We recommend remaining alert to what kinds of film experiences may prove too intense for some students and excuse them or provide alter-native assignments if at all possible. In areas that predictably upset many or most undergraduate students, such as invasive research procedures using primates or companion animals, the instructor might consider available alternatives. Unusual classroom demonstrations can
range from exciting and memorable to the questionable or inappropriate. The next case is illustrative.

Case 14-37 Bonnie Bruised Page 477

Case 14–37: Bonnie Bruised told her instructor, Professor Disclose, that she feared for her life. Her boyfriend had threatened and beaten her badly, breaking her wrist, and is currently stalking her. Professor Disclose advised the student to contact campus security and the counseling center immediately. The student adamantly refused to interact with either resource. Professor Disclose contacted them herself to warn of the potential danger to her student.
Professor Disclose has been put in a difficult
position because there is no mandated duty to impose herself into her student’s life. However, she feels morally obligated to take protective action despite possibly alienating her student by divulging information presumably shared in confidence. Depending on the circumstances (e.g., if the alleged offender is another student), Professor Disclose might have a reporting obligation under Title IX. It may be difficult to rebuild the student–instructor relationship with Ms. Bruised after she learns of the inter-vention. Under emergency conditions, ethical guidelines are not always helpful. Instructors (and therapists) can minimize greatly the risk of future censure, however, as long as their actions will be viewed as attempts to protect others rather than to exploit or harm them. (See Chapter 17 for more on decision making in emergency circumstances.)
Futzing With FERPA
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, a federal law (i.e., 20 U.S.C. § 1232g; 34 CFR Part 99, 1974), applies to all schools that receive federal funds from programs administered by the U.S. Department of Education. FERPA imposes firm limits on disclosing students’ educational records. Specific rights are assigned to parents by FERPA, but it transfers these to the designation of “eligible students” on attaining the age of 18 or when attending a school beyond the high school level. These rights include the ability to inspect and review any of the student’s education records maintained by the school. Redress procedures exist when parents or eligible students believe the records contain errors. Generally, schools must have written per-mission from the parent or eligible student to release any information from a student’s education record. Schools may disclose, with-out consent, directory information such as a student’s name, address, telephone number, date and place of birth, honors and awards, and dates of attendance. FERPA does allow schools to disclose records, without consent, under certain circumstances (see 34 CFR § 99.31). Examples of such releases might include those to school officials with legitimate educational interests; other schools to which a student seeks to transfer; appropriate parties in connection with accreditation, audits, or financial aid; responses to a judicial order or lawful subpoena; appropriate officials in cases of health and safety emergencies; and state and local authorities, pursuant to specific state law.

Case 14-42 After Pam Sincere Page 480

Case 14–42: After Pam Sincere completed a semester of her master’s-level counseling program at Minus College, she learned that the degree would not qualify her to sit for a licensing exam. When she confronted her advisor, he pointed out that the program did offer a legitimate academic degree with the title “counseling,” but made no promises about qualifications to enter into a licensed profession. He advised her to complete the program and later try to transfer into a doc-toral-level program. Sincere had not planned on committing to advanced study. Had Ms. Sincere actively sought information on licensing requirements she might have saved herself time, grief, and money. Students may readily assume, as did Ms. Sincere, that an advanced degree in counseling would lead to the opportunity to practice as a counselor without having to take additional course work. Minus College is, however, ultimately to blame The degree description should have conspicuously issued an appropriate caveat. Program representatives have the responsibility to take whatever extra steps are necessary to ensure that applicants are informed of changes or circum-stances that may affect their legitimate educational needs. Helping professionals who become involved with continuing education programs and workshops must realize that today’s busy consumers on a budget (and that includes other helping professionals) expect to get value for their time and treasure. Promotional materials should offer current and complete information, including realistic descriptions of what to expect. We have heard complaints from workshop attendees that the participants added nothing new beyond presenting material from their previously published books, which the attendees had already read. Many students base their course selections on catalog descriptions, especially when signing up for an unfamiliar course or one outside their major field of study. When a significant course component is added, shifted, or eliminated, a correction should be made in the next catalog printing. In the meantime, any discrepancies should be communicated in other forums (e.g., e-mail and websites, bulletin boards, department newsletters) and, most certainly, specifically addressed on the first day of class.

Case 14-49 Clinton Clever Page 483

Case 14–49: Clinton Clever’s term paper con-tained a literature background and a detailed design for an ingenious experiment. Professor Purloin fleshed it out a little more, collected data, and published it without any reference to Clever. Mr. Clever complained to his advisor, who in
turn confronted Purloin. Purloin’s response was, “Clever expressed no intention of ever running the study. He is just an undergraduate student. If he had asked to be involved, I would have let him help with it. He could never have executed it on his own. Besides, I gave him a perfect score on this paper.”
Professor Purloin’s attitude reflects a lack of
respect. That Clever is “just an undergraduate” is not relevant in and of itself. Further, it was not Clever’s responsibility to initiate an intention to execute the study to maintain proprietary rights of the design. It may well be true that Clever did not intend to run the study on his own and would have faced difficulties had he tried; how-ever, Professor Purloin should have consulted with the student. At that point, Clever could have declined the invitation to collaborate and
given Purloin permission to go ahead inde-pendently. Even then, it would have been very appropriate for Purloin to credit Clever’s contri-bution to the design in a footnote (APA: 8.12a, 8.12b; AAMFT: 5.6; ACA: G.5). What if Clever’s work had been less detailed, maybe in the form of a few sentences that sug-gested an idea for a study? We acknowledge that there comes a point at which a student paper or a casual discussion provides a glimmer of an idea that stimulates the development of an executable project. In such instances, involv-ing the others who may have jump-started an independent creation is not morally mandated, although we maintain that acknowledging the contributions of others never hurts anyone and can even enhance a positive reputation for mentoring. Research collaboration with students (including undergraduate students) is popu-lar because of the benefits that can accrue to everyone involved. Scholarly output remains a primary consideration in faculty promotion and retention decisions. Research experience is one of the primary determinants of gradu-ate school admission for many academic pro-grams (Keith-Spiegel, 1991; Keith-Spiegel, Tabachnick, & Spiegel, 1994). Instructors must be careful, however, to prepare their students with a realistic picture of expectations.

Chapter 15

Case 15-14 At the Farnsworth-Page 505

Case 15–14: At the Farnsworth Elementary School, teachers have full access to a child’s cumulative school record. Material of a personal nature entered in these records occasionally became a topic of conversation in the teach-er’s lounge. When school social worker Sylvia Caution, M.S.W., learned of this, she decided that she would no longer document any of her clinical observations in the record.
The case of the school record system high-lights a variety of issues covered in Chapter 6 and well described specifically in the school confidentiality context by others (Bor, Ebner-Landy, Gill, & Brace, 2002; Glosoff & Pate, 2002; Jacob & Hartshorne, 2003; McNamara, 2013; Moriya, 2006; Reamer, 2005). Sadly, Ms. Caution’s response seems a bit overreactive. As discussed in Chapter 6, record entries must be considered with a balance of utility and the need to know. The teachers may not need to know that Johnny Smith was born prior to his parents’ marriage, but it would clearly help Johnny if his teachers understood his tendency to withdraw socially when stressed. The circumstances of Johnny’s birth add nothing to assist in the promotion of his educational progress, but information regarding a tendency toward social withdrawal might help a teacher reach out to him more effectively in the classroom. In any case, his par-ents have a right to know who within the school will have access to what information and have the option to give or withhold their consent. Ms. Caution should take some professional initiative in educating her colleagues about more appropriate treatment of confidential information, or she could take steps to limit access to records if necessary

Chapter 16

Case 16-16 Nancy Icarus-Page 535

Case 16–16: Nancy Icarus, Ph.D., had always prided herself on a commitment to conducting ethical research. However, the IRB at her university was unreasonable in its demands in a way that unduly restricted her ability to do work in her specialty area. Several members obviously had no understanding of her field. Furthermore, the memos the IRBs issued were arrogant and rude. In frustration, she went ahead and conducted her research while misleading the IRB about what she was actually doing.
Ethical standards demand that when research requires approval by an institution, the information in the protocol must be accurate. Paradoxically, however, IRBs charged with upholding the responsible conduct of science may actually encourage deceit. We may have some sympathy for Dr. Icarus, who ran up against a wall and broke the rules to get around it. In the meantime, however, such research is not being properly monitored as required by federal policy. Participants’ rights could be slighted, but the institution may never know of it. Unfortunately, charges that IRBs are unreasonable, unresponsive, and incompetent are not uncommon (Giles, 2005; Keith-Spiegel & Koocher, 2005).

Chapter 18

Case 18-5 Mary Tripped-Up, PhD Page 615

Case 18–5: Mary Tripped-Up, Ph.D., was asked to undertake a child sexual abuse evaluation by a woman who was seeking a divorce because of domestic violence. Dr. Tripped-Up evaluated the child and found no signs of abuse. Nonetheless, she was subpoenaed to court by both parties in the divorce. In an informal meeting with both parties and their lawyers outside court, she was asked for “informal advice” on a child custody settlement. She made a variety of properly qualified recommendations, which were readily accepted by all concerned, and a court hearing was avoided. Months later, however, the settlement agreement broke down, and the father filed a licensing board complaint. The board, in a hurry to resolve cases, did not do a careful investigation and offered Dr. Tripped-Up a consent decree by which, if she admitted giving improper advice, they would simply issue a reprimand. Tripped-Up’s lawyer, who was unfamiliar with the issues and potential consequences, urged her to take the offer without seeking any expert advice. She accepted and was promptly sued by the father, who cited the consent agreement as evidence.
embarrassment for the licensing board when it realized that it had unintentionally led Dr. Sucker to breach the man’s confidence. Dr. Tripped-Up was dropped from two man-aged care panels because of disciplinary sanctions by the board. Ironically, she had done nothing wrong except to obtain and accept poor legal advice. The quality of licensing exams and statutes have also been called into question (e.g., Herbsled, Sales, & Overcast, 1985; Koocher, 1979, 1989). It is unreasonable to expect that licensing boards will credential only those who are competent and morally fit. The boards are established primarily to vet candidates against the minimum acceptable threshold of competence and to address complaints. The rules for minimum qualifications are often defined in legislation that boards must follow, and not every incompetent or unsavory practitioner is
reported or is the subject of complaints.
Because state licensing credentials vary in educational and experiential requirements across profession and state lines, mobility across state lines for psychologists, social workers, and counselors can prove difficult or unrealistic. Herman and Sharer (2013) provided a history of attempts to create national standards for psychologists, but attempts to date have not proven successful. Medicine and nursing have fared better as professions in promoting interstate mobility, and federal policy makers have stated that enhancing practice mobility is a priority. As was discussed in Chapter 4, this will become increasingly important as access to mental health services via telemetry becomes more prevalent. Unlike ethics committees, licensing boards
can prevent an unscrupulous and harmful individual from operating with a protected title in the state in which the individual is are licensed. Some also levy fines. This is tremendous power when one realizes that even successful criminal or civil litigation may not prevent a mental health professional from continuing to practice. In balance, the public is well served when a licensing body functions effectively and focuses on its primary role of protecting the public from unqualified and unethical practitioners. For U.S. and Canadian psychologists, the
most frequent causes among the 4,397 disciplinary actions during 1983–2009 were (in descending order of frequency) sexual mis-conduct, unprofessional conduct, nonsexual dual relationships, negligence, conviction of a crime, failure to maintain adequate or accurate records, and inadequate or improper super-vision or delegation (Pope & Vasquez, 2011). It has been estimated that as many as 11% of psychologists will have to respond to a licensing board complaint during the course of their careers (Schoenfeld, Hatch, & Gonzales, 2001), and licensing board complaints have become far more frequent than civil lawsuits. However, a good number of complaints, perhaps as high as 50%, are found to be groundless (Van Horn, 2004).
Ethics Committees
Ethics committees consist primarily of members of the profession—typically experienced and well regarded for their sensitivity to ethical matters—elected or appointed by the governing body of the professional association. Some committees include public members. Committee members serve without pay and, at the state and local levels, often without reimbursement for expenses. Serving on an ethics committee is not an easy duty. The dilemmas commit-tee members face are often extremely difficult because the issues are intricate, the parties to the action are distressed, and the facts of the case are not always clear. The time commitment can be extensive, and the experience itself is often both intense and exhausting. Ethics committees are able to investigate
violations at all levels of seriousness, whereas state regulatory boards rarely have sufficient resources or even the inclination to investigate behaviors that may be offensive to professional sensibilities and clearly cross the line but are not likely harmful to the public. For example, a dispute over a publication credit will not likely trigger the interest of an overburdened licensing board staff. It is in such contexts that the
ethics committees of professional associations can play a critical role in filling that gap. Many organizations subscribing to an eth-ics code—especially smaller organizations and state-level chapters —no longer adjudicate com-plaints. Instead, these organizations perform primarily educative and consulting functions and refer aggrieved consumers to the national associations or state licensing boards. Some may view ethics codes with no mechanism to back them up as mere window dressing, tooth-less, or possibly even misleading. However, they do set aspirations and expectations for mem-bers, establishing a standard of care for proper conduct. Some state and smaller associations offer consultation and hotlines when a member is facing a dilemma. Some screen applicants for evidence of unethical behavior prior
to
acceptance. There are understandable reasons why most
state professional associations no longer inves-tigate and adjudicate complaints. Objectivity requires
and complainants; this was difficult to ensure at the state level, requiring committee mem-bers
to often recuse themselves lack of familiarity with respondents (Grenier &
Golub, 2009). As complaints became more diverse and complex and as the potential for easy public access to guilty findings increased dramatically, the conclusions reached by ethics committees were more frequently appealed or challenged. Whereas ethics committees were originally intended to serve as the hallmark of a profession—namely, fulfilling an autonomous, monitoring function—accused mental health professionals today more often view the process as adversarial rather than collegial. Legal assistance, outside consultants, liability risk, and associated clerical and duplicating services quickly drain the already-modest budgets of most state and smaller organizations. Some professional associations drop members
who have been adjudicated for serious infractions by another legitimate authority. For example, the APA notifies other professional associations, licensing boards, and its members when it expels a member or when one resigns while under ethical scrutiny. If a complaint is received about a member who has been convicted of a felony (or equivalent criminal act) or found by a court of competent authority to have committed mal-practice, has lost a license, and a few other findings of ethical failings as adjudicated by another body, committees may accept such information as prima facie evidence and take action. Thus, the burden of ethics monitoring currently falls largely on national professional organizations, licensing boards, and the courts.

Although ethics committees of professional associations seem uniquely able to pick up some of the slack that other levels of control may be unwilling or unable to handle, whether they always exert a constructive and efficient means of peer control and public protection has also been called into question. Specific criticisms include bias among committee members; lack of training and experience of members to function adequately in a quasi-judicial capacity; conflicts of interest; excessive time taken to adjudicate cases, resulting in possible harm to the public in the interim; insufficient investigatory and other resources to do the job properly; failure to follow due process; timid procedures from fear of lawsuits; reactive rather than proactive procedures; and a bias favoring guild interests and due process rights of respondents over the welfare of the complainants or (conversely) the tendency to take the complainants’ sides while depriving the respondents of due process and an unbiased tribunal. Frustrated complainants can always con-tact lawyers or the media when sources of redress are inefficient or reach unwelcome conclusions