American Psychological Association (APA) Ethics Code - Essay Example

American Psychological Association and American Counseling Association Ethics Code Introduction There is no doubt health care workers’ ethical principles assign their practice and welfare of their patients, and counseling is not an exception. In this respect, American Psychological Association (APA) and American Counseling Association (ACA) ethical codes serve as a great source of ethical principles and standards essential for professional provision of psychological services by counselors. Their strict observance is able not only to assist people in their striving to peace of mind but also to contribute to professionals’ avoidance of such problems as loss of license and deprivation of practice. Analysis of the cases recorded in Adverse Actions Reports as examples of ethical principles violation adds to understanding of counselors’ breach of their duties advocated by the ACA and APA. 2011 Adverse Actions Report 2011 Adverse Actions Report is the first report under analysis manifesting certain contraventions of ethical principles essential for professional provision of psychological aid to clients. The first board action, Marina Greco, represents violation of general principles of the ACA and APA. The case entails Greco’s hiding (absence of records) of information about her consultations with other professionals for becoming a foster parent of her client. Thus, the professional has fallen for subjectivity and tried to conceal that fact. In this respect, ignorance of the ACA and APA principles is evident, since they advocate professionals’ responsibility for their actions (the APA Principle B, Fidelity and Responsibility, and the ACA Principle A.6, Managing and Maintaining Boundaries and Professional Relationships) and avoidance of factors leading to loss of objectivity. It is apparent, the APA and ACA share one view on the required professionals’ objectivity for the most effective services contributive for the clients’ welfare. The next case represents the professional’s (Daniel Herrera) desire to provide counseling services despite his unstable condition regarding to behavioral health issues. Moreover, Herrera has strived for practice of an associate substance abuse counselor being himself dependent on alcohol (Adverse Actions Report, 2011). This brings evidence of violation of the APA ethical standard 2.03, Maintaining Competence, for despite Herrera’s theoretical competence for counseling, there is a risk that his personal experience of alcohol abuse may prevent him from objective vision of helpful methods for overcoming substance abuse by his clients. As for the ACA, according to its Principle C.2.g., Impairment, “Counselors monitor themselves for signs of impairment from their own physical, mental, or emotional problems and refrain from offering or providing professional services when impaired” (ACA, 2014). There is no doubt, Herrera had not to pretend for counseling practice, for the latter under his authority could not assure clients’ welfare and promote healthy relationships between the professional and clients. So, both the APA and ACA advocate maintenance of counselors’ competence and its checking to identify their professional integrity. 2012 Adverse Actions Report 2012 Adverse Actions Report also gives appropriate data manifesting counselors’ violation of professional ethics principles included in the APA and ACA. For example, the case of Jennifer Hill serves as a clear example of the professional’s failure in following ethical ethic norms specific for counseling. The whole thing is that Hill has been engaged in sexual relationship with her client for some time, which is adverse to the APA Ethical Standard 3.02, Sexual Harassment, namely: “Psychologists do not engage in sexual harassment” (APA, 2002). Such a point is also peculiar to the ACA, which A.5.a. Principle prohibits counselors’ involvement in sexual and/or romantic interaction with their clients. In such a manner, the APA and ACA uphold the same view of counselors’ non-professional connection with their clients as a factor depriving them from objective assessment of the required help. The action of Patrick Kelly, in turn, brings evidence in favor of some professionals’ tendency to violate ethical principles of the APA and ACA and mislead their clients for personal deceptive purposes. In particular, Kelly’s case shows the counselor’s exaggeration of his counseling experience for increase of incomes resulted from acceptance of more clients (Adverse Actions Report, 2012). Definitely, such an action violates ethical principles of the profession, that is, the APA 2.01.a. and the ACA C.2.a. ethical standards defining boundaries of competence, which determines framework of psychological counseling as dependent on the professionals’ true previous experience. One way or another, both the APA and ACA proclaim counselors’ professional responsibility for their practice, which violation is punishable. 2013 Adverse Actions Report The APA and ACA’s sameness of ethical principles manifest itself in 2013 Adverse Actions Report as well. Just so, Janet Carpentler’s action proves their unity of ethical principles regarding the issue of psychological services interruption in the context of the professionals’ illness as a cause of their inability to provide advantageous results for their clients’ welfare. The thing is that Carpentler (Licensee) has concealed her pains from her agency in order not to be deprived from practice: “A preliminary review of Licensee's pharmacy records revealed multiple prescriptions for pain medications filled at multiple pharmacies” (Adverse Actions Report, 2013). And according to the APA ethical standard of human relations, which number is 3.12, Interruption of Psychological Services, professionals cannot continue their practice being afflicting with illness. As for the ACA, its principle C.2.h., Counselor Incapacitation, Death, Retirement, or Termination of Practice, stands for counselors’ need to transfer their clients to other professionals, if they suffer from sickness. The next case is Christina Allen’s one, which presents her involvement in friendly relationship with her client. Moreover, the professional has been mixed up in smoking of marijuana. In this respect, there are two violations of ethical principles manifested by this case. The first one underlies in expansion of relationship with a client over and above of strictly professional interaction with the main purpose of psychological aid provision. Specifically, this standard is reflected in the APA 3.05.a. standard, Multiple Relationships, which may mislead professionals and prevent their help beneficial for their clients’ welfare. As for the ACA, this case rather refers to the ethical standard A.5.d., Friends or Family Members, than to A.6.b., Extending Counseling Boundaries, for the professional-client relationship bears greater resemblance of friendly, totally non-objective interaction, that ordinary extension of professional boundaries for further analysis of the client’s mental condition. Anyway, common visits of night clubs, drinking alcohol and smoking marijuana add to the professional’s subjectivity and inability to provide effective psychological services to the client during sessions. Conclusion All things considered, the APA and ACA prove their unity in views on ethical principles required for effective psychological help provided by counselors. Serving as a guideline, both codes of professional conduct contribute to professionals’ awareness of their main purpose and outline counselors’ potential mistakes for their prevention. Above analyzed cases of ethical principles violation manifest significant role of the APA and ACA ethical codes and their following by counselors for implementation of their main duty, that is, provision of people’s welfare. References ACA Code of Ethics. (2014). The American Counseling Association. Retrieved 7 Sept. from: http://www.counseling.org/resources/aca-code-of-ethics.pdf Adverse Actions Report. (2011). Arizona Board of Behavioral Health Examiners. Retrieved 7 Sept. from: http://azbbhe.us/sites/default/files/adverse%20actions/2011advaction.pdf Adverse Actions Report. (2012). Arizona Board of Behavioral Health Examiners. Retrieved 7 Sept. from: http://azbbhe.us/sites/default/files/adverse%20actions/2012advaction_0.pdf Adverse Actions Report. (2013). Arizona Board of Behavioral Health Examiners. Retrieved 7 Sept. from: http://azbbhe.us/sites/default/files/adverse%20actions/2013advaction_0.pdf APA: Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (2002). The American Psychological Association, 2010. Retrieved 7 Sept. from: http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/principles.pdf Read More