Question

Is the following scenarios Ethical or Unethical? If it is ethical select true. If if is unethical select false

1) “A recently hired school psychologist discovered that district-mandated test batteries for suspected learning disabilities were outdated, were inconsistent with current professional standards, and violated the intent of special education laws that require that tests be selected in light of the unique characteristics of the individual child. She reasoned that as a new hire, it would be professionally risky to raise this issue with the district school psychology supervisor and decided to do her best for the children using the districts test battery” (see Standard 9.02a, Use of Assessments).

2) A client told a psychologist about the sexual misconduct of another psychologist with whom the client had previously been in psychotherapy (See Standard 10.05, Sexual Intimacies With Current Therapy Clients/Patients). Judging that it was clinically appropriate, the psychologists discussed with the client the unethical nature of the previous therapist’s behavior and the available reporting options. The psychologist, respecting the client’s request to keep the sexual relationship confidential, did not pursue reporting the violation (See Standard 4.01, Maintaining Confidentiality).

3) A client told a psychologist about the sexual misconduct of another psychologist with whom the client had previously been in psychotherapy (See Standard 10.05, Sexual Intimacies With Current Therapy Clients/Patients). Judging that it was clinically appropriate, the psychologists discussed with the client the unethical nature of the previous therapist’s behavior and the available reporting options. The psychologist, respecting the client’s request to keep the sexual relationship confidential, did not pursue reporting the violation (See Standard 4.01, Maintaining Confidentiality).

4) “A psychology department voted to deny doctoral candidacy to a student in the department’s master’s program solely because she had filed a still pending sexual harassment complaint against a member of the faculty” (see Standard 1.08 Unfair Discrimination Against Complaints and Respondents).

5) “A psychologist who accused a colleague of insurance fraud was found to have fabricated the evidence used against the colleague. The psychologist was fired from the group practice.” (see Standard 1.07 Improper Complaints)

Answer 1

1)False

Explanation: A test that has been declared outdated and especially the one that violates the intent of special educational laws by no means should be used under any circumstance. This is because the reports obtained from its data would be invalid and flawed, and further intervention that needs to be designed for the children based on that report would most probably be ineffective or it might harm the children as well. This is an outright violation of ethical principles, hence, FALSE.

2)False

Explanation: Sexual Harassment is a crime. Any act that is considered a crime in legal terms must be reported no matter what. There are various governmental policies that advocate ‘mandatory reporting’ of sexual abuse. However in this case, ‘not’ reporting might seem fair and ethical from one perspective, since the psychologist has not violated the confidentiality of the client and has also helped the client by guiding the client with the available options for reporting the matter. On the other hand, from a greater perspective, if the client does not report the crime at all, it should be the responsibility of the psychologist to do so. This is because being aware of a crime and not reporting it might be considered as unlawful as well. In addition, working in the health sector mandates the protection and determination of safety of the clients. Knowing someone who works in the health sector, one who engages in such a crime, violates the protection rights of the clients or puts them in any sort of danger must be reported without any further delay. Hence, the answer is FALSE.

3)Repeated question, so same answer as answer number

4)False

Explanation: This is unethical because this violates the rights of the student. A student, no matter what, must not be deprived of any educational privilege of which he/she is deserving. By deserving implies having qualified for all the necessary requirements stated for the designation (here, Doctoral candidacy). Having qualified by merit and being denied only on the basis of reporting against some member of the faculty is wrong and unethical. Hence, FALSE.

5)True

Explanation: It was ethical to fire the psychologist because it is clear that the person had framed the colleague and had falsely accused the person. This again violates the basic rights of the person who was falsely accused. Hence, it was a justified action taken against the psychologist as a form of punishment, as well as for the protection of the rights of the other members of the firm. Thus the answer here is TRUE.