case study on ethical violations in psychology

• General Categories
• Mental Health
• IQ and Intelligence
• Bipolar Disorder

Ethical Violations in Psychology: Consequences and Prevention Strategies

From the sacred trust between therapist and client to the integrity of groundbreaking research, the field of psychology is built upon a foundation of unwavering ethical standards – a foundation that, when compromised, can lead to devastating consequences. The realm of psychology, with its intricate web of human interactions and delicate balance of power, demands an unwavering commitment to ethical conduct. It’s a field where the stakes are high, and the potential for harm is ever-present.

Imagine, for a moment, the vulnerability of a client baring their soul to a therapist, or the trust placed in researchers to uncover truths about the human mind. These scenarios underscore the critical importance of ethics in psychological practice. Without a strong ethical framework, the entire edifice of psychology could crumble, leaving a trail of broken trust and shattered lives in its wake.

The journey towards establishing ethical guidelines in psychology has been long and, at times, tumultuous. From the early days of Freudian psychoanalysis, where boundaries were often blurred, to the shocking revelations of unethical experiments in the mid-20th century, the field has grappled with defining and refining its moral compass. Today, we stand on the shoulders of those who fought to establish clear ethical boundaries, yet the battle is far from over.

The Ethical Minefield: Where Violations Commonly Occur

As we delve deeper into the ethical landscape of psychology, it becomes apparent that certain areas are particularly prone to violations. These ethical hotspots often arise where the lines between professional and personal blur, where the allure of groundbreaking research tempts shortcuts, or where the complexities of human interaction challenge even the most well-intentioned practitioners.

One of the most sacred tenets of psychology is confidentiality. The trust that clients place in their therapists is paramount, and any breach can have far-reaching consequences. Yet, in an age of digital records and interconnected systems, maintaining absolute confidentiality has become increasingly challenging. From inadvertent disclosures to deliberate breaches, ethical issues in psychology often revolve around this fundamental principle.

Another treacherous terrain is that of dual relationships and boundary violations. The power dynamic between a psychologist and their client or research subject is inherently unbalanced, and maintaining appropriate boundaries is crucial. However, the line can sometimes become blurred, especially in small communities or specialized fields where paths frequently cross outside the professional setting.

Informed consent, a cornerstone of ethical practice, is another area ripe for potential violations. In the rush to advance knowledge or treat patients, practitioners may sometimes fail to fully explain the risks and implications of treatment or research participation. This oversight, whether intentional or not, undermines the autonomy and dignity of those involved.

When Ethics Take a Back Seat: Types of Violations

Let’s take a closer look at some of the most common ethical violations that plague the field of psychology. These transgressions range from the subtle to the egregious, but all have the potential to cause significant harm.

Confidentiality breaches, as mentioned earlier, can take many forms. It might be as simple as a therapist discussing a client’s case with a colleague without proper anonymization, or as severe as selling client data to third parties. In an era where information is currency, the temptation to misuse confidential data is ever-present.

Dual relationships and boundary violations occur when the professional line is crossed. This could involve a therapist entering into a business partnership with a client, or worse, engaging in a romantic relationship. Such violations exploit the vulnerable position of the client and can lead to lasting psychological damage.

Informed consent issues arise when participants in research or therapy are not fully aware of what they’re agreeing to. This could involve withholding crucial information about potential risks or using deception in research without proper justification and debriefing. Ethical issues in psychological research often stem from a failure to obtain truly informed consent.

Competence and scope of practice violations occur when psychologists operate outside their areas of expertise. This might involve a therapist trained in adult psychology attempting to treat complex childhood disorders, or a researcher venturing into unfamiliar territory without proper preparation or supervision.

Perhaps one of the most damaging forms of ethical violation is research misconduct and data manipulation. The pressure to publish, secure funding, or make groundbreaking discoveries can sometimes lead researchers down a dark path. Fabricating data, selectively reporting results, or manipulating statistics not only undermines the integrity of the field but can also lead to real-world harm if faulty conclusions inform policy or treatment decisions.

The Ripple Effect: Consequences of Ethical Breaches

When ethical standards are compromised in psychology, the consequences can be far-reaching and devastating. The impact reverberates through individual lives, professional careers, and the entire field of psychology.

For clients and research participants, the effects of ethical violations can be profound and long-lasting. A breach of confidentiality might lead to personal or professional repercussions, damaged relationships, or even legal troubles. Boundary violations in therapy can leave clients feeling betrayed, confused, and unable to trust future mental health professionals. Participants in unethical research may suffer physical or psychological harm, or make life decisions based on faulty information.

The professional repercussions for psychologists who violate ethical standards are severe. Depending on the nature and severity of the violation, consequences can range from formal reprimands to loss of licensure and the end of a career. The conflict of interest in psychology can lead to situations where a practitioner’s judgment is compromised, often with dire professional consequences.

Legal consequences and malpractice suits are a very real possibility in cases of serious ethical violations. Psychologists may find themselves facing civil lawsuits or even criminal charges, depending on the nature of their actions. The financial and emotional toll of such legal battles can be enormous, even if the practitioner is ultimately exonerated.

Perhaps most insidiously, ethical violations damage the reputation of the entire field of psychology. Each high-profile case of misconduct erodes public trust in psychological research and practice. This can lead to decreased funding for important research, skepticism towards mental health treatment, and a general devaluation of psychological expertise in public discourse.

Cautionary Tales: Notable Ethical Violations in Psychology

The annals of psychology are unfortunately replete with examples of ethical violations that serve as stark reminders of the importance of maintaining rigorous ethical standards. These case studies not only illustrate the potential for harm but also provide valuable lessons for future practitioners and researchers.

One of the most infamous examples is the Stanford Prison Experiment, conducted by Philip Zimbardo in 1971. This study, which aimed to investigate the psychological effects of perceived power in a simulated prison environment, quickly spiraled out of control. Participants playing the roles of guards became abusive, while those playing prisoners experienced severe psychological distress. The experiment was terminated early, but not before raising serious questions about the ethics of placing participants in potentially harmful situations for the sake of research.

Another shocking revelation came with the Hoffman Report in 2015, which exposed the American Psychological Association’s involvement in the U.S. government’s torture program. This report revealed how some psychologists had colluded with the Department of Defense to justify enhanced interrogation techniques, fundamentally violating the principle of “do no harm” that underpins the profession.

Unethical psychology experiments like these serve as stark reminders of the potential for harm when ethical boundaries are crossed. They underscore the need for constant vigilance and robust ethical frameworks in psychological research and practice.

Therapist-patient sexual relationships represent one of the most egregious ethical violations in clinical practice. Despite clear prohibitions, cases of sexual involvement between therapists and clients continue to occur, often with devastating consequences for the vulnerable clients involved. These cases not only violate professional ethics but can also result in criminal charges.

In the realm of research, falsification of data in high-profile studies has repeatedly rocked the foundations of psychological science. One notable example is the case of Diederik Stapel, a Dutch social psychologist who was found to have fabricated or manipulated data in dozens of published studies. Such cases of research misconduct not only damage individual careers but also undermine the credibility of psychological research as a whole.

Safeguarding Ethics: Prevention Strategies

Given the severe consequences of ethical violations, it’s crucial to implement robust prevention strategies. These strategies must be comprehensive, addressing both individual and systemic factors that contribute to ethical lapses.

Ongoing ethics education and training form the foundation of ethical practice. Ethics in psychology is not a static field; as new technologies and research methodologies emerge, so do new ethical challenges. Regular training helps psychologists stay abreast of evolving ethical standards and provides a forum for discussing complex ethical dilemmas.

Implementing robust ethical decision-making models can provide a framework for navigating difficult situations. These models encourage practitioners to consider multiple perspectives, weigh potential consequences, and consult relevant ethical guidelines before making decisions.

Peer consultation and supervision play a crucial role in maintaining ethical standards. By discussing challenging cases or research dilemmas with colleagues, psychologists can gain valuable insights and avoid potential pitfalls. This collaborative approach also helps to create a culture of ethical awareness within the profession.

Institutional review boards (IRBs) and ethics committees serve as crucial gatekeepers, particularly in research settings. These bodies review proposed studies to ensure they meet ethical standards, protecting the rights and welfare of research participants. Similarly, professional organizations often have ethics committees that can provide guidance and, when necessary, investigate ethical complaints.

Perhaps most importantly, cultivating self-reflection and personal awareness is essential for ethical practice. Psychologists must be willing to examine their own biases, motivations, and potential conflicts of interest. This ongoing process of self-examination helps to prevent unconscious ethical lapses and fosters a deep commitment to ethical conduct.

Navigating the Future: Ethical Challenges in Modern Psychology

As psychology evolves and adapts to a rapidly changing world, new ethical challenges continue to emerge. These challenges require ongoing discussion, research, and policy development to ensure that ethical standards keep pace with technological and social changes.

Telepsychology and online therapy have exploded in popularity, particularly in the wake of global events like the COVID-19 pandemic. While these modalities offer increased access to mental health services, they also raise new ethical considerations. Issues of privacy, confidentiality, and the ability to respond to crises in remote settings are just a few of the challenges that need to be addressed.

Cultural competence and diversity issues have come to the forefront of ethical discussions in psychology. As our understanding of cultural differences and systemic inequalities deepens, psychologists must grapple with how to provide culturally sensitive and equitable care. This includes acknowledging and addressing biases in research methodologies and clinical practices that have historically marginalized certain groups.

The pervasive use of social media has blurred the lines between personal and professional lives, creating new ethical dilemmas for psychologists. Maintaining appropriate boundaries with clients in the age of Facebook and Twitter requires careful consideration and clear guidelines.

Artificial intelligence and big data analytics offer exciting possibilities for psychological research and practice, but they also raise significant ethical concerns. Issues of data privacy, algorithmic bias, and the potential for AI to replace human judgment in clinical settings are just some of the challenges that need to be addressed.

The Ethical Imperative: A Call to Action

As we’ve explored the landscape of ethical violations in psychology, from the devastating consequences to the strategies for prevention, one thing becomes abundantly clear: maintaining ethical standards is not just a professional obligation, but a moral imperative.

The 5 ethical principles in psychology – beneficence and nonmaleficence, fidelity and responsibility, integrity, justice, and respect for people’s rights and dignity – serve as a guiding light. They remind us that at the heart of psychological practice and research lies a fundamental commitment to human welfare and dignity.

Yet, as we’ve seen, these principles are not self-enforcing. They require constant vigilance, ongoing education, and a willingness to engage in difficult conversations. The ethical challenges facing psychology are not static; they evolve with our changing society and technological landscape. As such, our approach to ethics must be dynamic and proactive.

For individual psychologists, this means committing to lifelong learning about ethical issues, seeking out supervision and consultation when faced with ethical dilemmas, and cultivating a deep sense of personal and professional integrity. It means being willing to speak up when ethical violations are observed, even when doing so is uncomfortable or potentially costly.

For the field as a whole, it means fostering a culture where ethical conduct is not just expected, but celebrated. It means supporting robust systems of oversight and accountability, while also providing resources and support for psychologists grappling with ethical challenges. It means engaging in ongoing research and dialogue about emerging ethical issues, ensuring that our ethical frameworks remain relevant and effective.

The consequences of ethical violations in psychology are too severe to ignore. From the individual client who suffers a breach of trust, to the broader public whose faith in psychological science is shaken by research misconduct, the stakes are immensely high. Yet, with each ethical challenge we face and overcome, we strengthen the foundation of our field.

As we look to the future, let us remember that ethics in psychology is not a burden, but a privilege. It is the means by which we honor the trust placed in us by our clients, our research participants, and society at large. It is how we ensure that our work truly serves the greater good, advancing our understanding of the human mind and behavior while respecting the dignity and rights of every individual.

In the end, ethical conduct in psychology is not just about avoiding harm or meeting professional standards. It’s about striving for excellence, about pushing the boundaries of our knowledge and practice in ways that uplift and empower. It’s about realizing the full potential of psychology as a force for positive change in the world.

So let this be a call to action for all psychologists, present and future. Let us commit ourselves anew to the highest ethical standards, not out of fear of consequences, but out of a genuine desire to do what is right. Let us approach each day, each client, each research project with a renewed sense of ethical purpose. For in doing so, we not only protect our field – we elevate it.

References:

1. American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Washington, DC: Author.

2. Barnett, J. E., & Johnson, W. B. (2015). Ethics desk reference for counselors. John Wiley & Sons.

3. Fisher, C. B. (2016). Decoding the ethics code: A practical guide for psychologists. Sage Publications.

4. Hoffman, D. H., Carter, D. J., Viglucci Lopez, C. R., Benzmiller, H. L., Guo, A. X., Latifi, S. Y., & Craig, D. C. (2015). Report to the special committee of the board of directors of the American Psychological Association: Independent review relating to APA ethics guidelines, national security interrogations, and torture. Chicago, IL: Sidley Austin LLP.

5. Knapp, S., & VandeCreek, L. (2012). Practical ethics for psychologists: A positive approach. American Psychological Association.

6. Pope, K. S., & Vasquez, M. J. (2016). Ethics in psychotherapy and counseling: A practical guide. John Wiley & Sons.

7. Teo, T. (2015). Critical psychology: A geography of intellectual engagement and resistance. American Psychologist, 70(3), 243-254.

8. Zimbardo, P. G. (2007). The Lucifer effect: Understanding how good people turn evil. Random House.

Was this article helpful?

Would you like to add any comments (optional), leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Post Comment

Related Resources

Psychology Pre-Med: Bridging Mind and Medicine in Your Medical Journey

NJ Psychology License: A Comprehensive Guide to Becoming Licensed in…

Psychology and Pre-Law: Building a Strong Foundation for Legal Studies

Professional Psychology Research and Practice: Bridging Theory and Application

Psychological Principles: Foundations of Human Behavior and Mental Processes

Psychological Science vs Psychology: Key Differences and Similarities

Informed Consent in Psychology: Ethical Foundations and Practical Applications

Pseudoscience in Psychology: Separating Fact from Fiction in Mental Health

NYS Psychology License: A Comprehensive Guide to Certification and Practice

Implicit Bias in Psychology: Definition, Impact, and Strategies for Mitigation

Ethics & Psychology

• General Resources
• Animal Subjects
• Human Subjects
• Case Studies

Collections of Cases

• Ethics Case Studies in Mental Health Research A large collection of cases addressing issues such as human participants in research, conflict of interest, and the responsible collection, management, and use of research data.
• Ethics Education Library -Psychology Case Studies A collection of over 90 case studies from the Ethics Education Library.
• Ethics Rounds A collection of case studies published in the American Psychological Association's "Monitor on Ethics".

Case Investigations by Government Agencies/Professional Organizations

• Office of Research Integrity Cases summaries from the past four years of investigations and inquiries done by the Office of Research Integrity. Also includes short case summaries from 1994 onwards.

Books, Anthologies, & More

• << Previous: Human Subjects
• Last Updated: Dec 15, 2023 10:40 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.iit.edu/psychologyethics

Ethics and Psychology

Where ethics is more than a code

Welcome to the Nexus of Ethics, Psychology, Morality, Philosophy and Health Care

Vignette warehouse (39).

• High School
• You don't have any recent items yet.
• You don't have any courses yet.
• You don't have any books yet.
• You don't have any Studylists yet.
• Information

PSY-510 Case Study 2

Contemporary and ethical issues in psychology (psy-510), grand canyon university, students also viewed.

• Benchmark Critical Thinking
• Case Study Handling Disparate 3
• Case Study Handling Disparate 2
• Case Study Handling Disparate 1
• Academic honesty and plagiarism psy 510
• ethical consultation

Related documents

• Dr. Vaji Study
• Violated if they are not psy 510
• Testimony 101
• 1Obj 3.1 and 3.3 Benchmark – Critical Thinking
• Week Three Critical Thinking Essay (Final)
• Duty To Protect - worksheet

Preview text

Psy-510 contemporary and ethical issues in psychology, case study: duty to protect.

Directions: In a minimum of 50 words, for each question, thoroughly answer each of the questions below regarding the case featuring Dr. Daniela Yeung. Use one to two scholarly resources to support your answers. Use in-text citations, when appropriate, according to APA formatting. 1. Why is this an ethical dilemma? Which APA Ethical Principles help frame the nature of the dilemma? Dr. Daniela Yeung&#039;s case presents an ethical dilemma because it involves a conflict between two or more ethical principles that guide professional conduct in psychology. In Dr. Yeung&#039;s case, the ethical dilemma could be framed by the following APA Ethical Principles: Beneficence and Nonmaleficence: This principle requires psychologists to strive to benefit those with whom they work and take care to do no harm. In Dr. Yeung&#039;s case, she might be torn between doing what is beneficial for her client and avoiding harm to others who might be affected by her client&#039;s actions (APA, 2017). Fidelity and Responsibility: Psychologists are expected to establish relationships of trust with those with whom they work. They are also responsible for their professional behavior, including avoiding conflicts of interest. Dr. Yeung might be facing a dilemma between maintaining trust with her client and fulfilling her responsibility to society (APA, 2017). Respect for People&#039;s Rights and Dignity: Psychologists respect the dignity and worth of all people, and the rights of individuals to privacy, confidentiality, and self-determination. Dr. Yeung&#039;s dilemma might involve respecting her client&#039;s right to confidentiality while considering the potential harm to others (APA, 2017). 2. Who are the stakeholders and how will they be affected by how Dr. Yeung resolves this dilemma? The stakeholders in Dr. Yeung&#039;s dilemma are: 1. Dr. Yeung: As the primary decision-maker, the way she resolves the dilemma will directly impact her professional and ethical standing. 2. The Patient: The patient&#039;s health and trust in medical professionals are at stake. The resolution could affect their health outcomes and their perception of medical ethics. 3. The Medical Community: This includes other doctors, medical staff, and the broader healthcare system. The resolution of the dilemma could set a precedent that influences future ethical decisions.

• The Pharmaceutical Company: If the company is promoting a drug with potentially harmful side effects, their reputation and financial standing could be affected by Dr. Yeung&#039;s decision. If she chooses to prescribe the drug, she may face ethical dilemmas and potential legal issues. If he refuses, she may face pressure from the pharmaceutical company or even her peers. If the drug is prescribed and causes harm, the patient&#039;s health could be negatively impacted. If the drug is not prescribed, the patient may miss out on potentially beneficial treatment. The decision could set a precedent for how similar ethical dilemmas will be handled in the future. It could also impact the trust between patients and healthcare providers. If Dr. Yeung refuses to prescribe the drug, it could lead to a loss in sales. If she exposes potentially harmful side effects, the company could face legal action and damage to their reputation.
• Does this situation meet the standards set by the Tarasoff Duty to Protect statute (see Chapter 8)? Dr. Yeung has an important decision to make, as a psychologist who knows the importance of protecting confidentiality and as a researcher who knows the responsibility to protect both herself and the research participants. How might Dr. Yeung’s decision be influenced by whether or not her state (e. Arizona) includes researchers within the Duty to Protect statute’s influence? The Tarasoff Duty to Protect statute is a legal principle that originated from the case of Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California. It imposes a duty on mental health professionals to protect individuals who are being threatened with bodily harm by a patient (Knoll, 2019). The professional is responsible for fulfilling their duty by exerting a reasonable effort to inform the intended victim and notify law enforcement officials. The determination of whether this duty aligns with the standards established by the Tarasoff Duty to Protect statute cannot be definitively ascertained without specific details regarding the situation. Nevertheless, if Dr. Yeung&#039;s patient has explicitly expressed a clear and immediate intention to cause harm to another individual, then the Tarasoff Duty may be applicable. The application of the Tarasoff Duty varies across different states, with some states explicitly encompassing researchers within the Duty to Protect statute, while others do not. In the event that Dr. Yeung practices in a state such as Arizona, which does not explicitly include researchers, she may not possess a legal obligation to breach confidentiality. However, ethical considerations may still impel her to take action. Even in the absence of a legal requirement, Dr. Yeung may still feel ethically compelled to safeguard potential victims. The Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct established by the American Psychological Association stipulates that psychologists should undertake reasonable measures to protect the well-being and rights of those with whom they engage. Dr. Yeung&#039;s decision-making process may be influenced by various factors: if the threat is severe and immediate, she may experience a heightened compulsion to breach confidentiality; if the threat is ambiguous or uncertain, she may opt to continue monitoring the situation. It is important to acknowledge that breaching

Standard 4: Discussing the Limits of Confidentiality This standard requires psychologists to discuss the limits of confidentiality with their clients. If Dr. Yeung has not had this discussion with her clients, she would be violating this standard. Standard 4: Disclosures This standard states that psychologists may disclose confidential information with the appropriate consent of the individual or organizational client, or the individual&#039;s legally authorized representative. If Dr. Yeung is disclosing information without proper consent, she would be in violation of this standard. Standard 8: Institutional Approval This standard requires psychologists to seek approval from an appropriate institution before conducting research. If Dr. Yeung is conducting research without proper approval, she would be violating this standard. Without more specific details about Dr. Yeung&#039;s case, it&#039;s difficult to identify other potentially relevant standards. However, some other standards that might apply include:  Standard 2: Maintaining Competence - If Dr. Yeung is not making ongoing efforts to maintain her competence in her field, she could be in violation of this standard.  Standard 3: Multiple Relationships - If Dr. Yeung is involved in multiple relationships that could impair her objectivity, competence, or effectiveness, she could be in violation of this standard. Standard 9: Bases for Assessments - If Dr. Yeung is making assessments based on information and techniques sufficient to substantiate her findings, she could be in violation of this standard. 6. What are Dr. Yeung’s ethical alternatives for resolving this dilemma? Which alternative best reflects the Ethics Code aspirational principles and enforceable standards, legal standards, and obligations to stakeholders? Can you identify the ethical theory (discussed in Chapter 4) guiding your decision? Dr. Daniela Yeung, facing an ethical dilemma, has several alternatives:

• Continue the therapy sessions without disclosing her relationship with the client&#039;s ex- spouse.
• Disclose her relationship with the client&#039;s ex-spouse and continue the therapy sessions if the client is comfortable.
• Refer the client to another therapist due to potential conflict of interest. The best alternative that reflects the Ethics Code aspirational principles, legal standards, and obligations to stakeholders would be to disclose her relationship with the client&#039;s ex- spouse and, based on the client&#039;s comfort level, decide whether to continue the therapy or refer the client to another therapist. This approach respects the principles of autonomy,

beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, and fidelity. It also aligns with legal standards of informed consent and professional boundaries. The ethical theory guiding this decision is Deontology. This theory emphasizes duties and rules, and the act of telling the truth is seen as a moral duty (Fisher, 2021). It also values the principle of autonomy, respecting the client&#039;s right to make informed decisions about their therapy (Fisher, 2021). 7. What steps should Dr. Yeung take to implement her decision and monitor its effect? Develop a Detailed Plan  Identify the tasks that need to be accomplished for the decision to be implemented.  Determine the resources required (e., personnel, budget, time).  Establish a timeline for implementation. Communicate the Decision  Clearly communicate the decision to all relevant stakeholders.  Explain the rationale behind the decision and how it will benefit the organization. Delegate Tasks  Assign tasks to team members based on their skills and capabilities.  Ensure everyone understands their responsibilities and deadlines. Provide Support and Resources  Ensure team members have the resources and support they need to carry out their tasks.  Be available to answer questions and provide guidance. Monitor Progress  Regularly check on the progress of the implementation.  Use metrics to measure the effectiveness of the decision. Evaluate and Adjust  After the decision has been implemented, evaluate its effectiveness.  If necessary, make adjustments based on feedback and results. References: American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct (2002, amended effective June 1, 2010, and January 1, 2017). apa/ethics/code/index.html Fisher, C. B. (2021). Decoding the ethics code (5th ed., pp. 59). SAGE Publications.

• Multiple Choice

Course : Contemporary and Ethical Issues in Psychology (PSY-510)

University : grand canyon university, this is a preview.

Access to all documents

Get Unlimited Downloads

Improve your grades

Get 30 days of free Premium

Share your documents to unlock

Why is this page out of focus?

Yogi, P. \(2015, February 11\). Ethical issues in psychology. Psych Yogi. Retrieved from http://psychyogi.org/ethical-issues-in-psychology.

CITE AS: Yogi, P. \(2015, February 11\). Ethical issues in psychology. Psych Yogi. http://psychyogi.org/ethical-issues-in-psychology.