Fluent Essays

Week 2Discussion 1Ethical Dilemmas Prior to beginning work on this discussion forum, review the MHHS Case Study and the two required chapters from the Knapp, VandeCreek, and Fingerhut book, Practical Ethics for Psychologists: A Positive Approach: Foundations of Ethical Behavior and Ethical Decision Making.Identify a minimum of one ethical dilemma that you have identified in the MHHS case study. Discuss the challenges you would face as a human services provider when dealing with this issue. How would you overcome these challenges? As you respond to this question consider how you would deal with this issue based on your future role in a human services organization. If you plan a direct service route vs. a leadership route how does this impact how you would approach the issue? Your post should contain a minimum of 400 words.SEE ATTACHMENTS FOR REQUIRED CHAPTERS AND CASE STUDYDiscussion 2 (For this discussion you will focus on step 2: second, third, and fourth bulletPortfoliumPrior to beginning work on this discussion forum, review the Portfolium materials listed below. Throughout this course you will build a personal electronic portfolio or “ePortfolio.” The ePortfolio tool will help you track your professional and academic progress. Once you graduate, it can also be used to demonstrate your skills and competencies to potential employers and the professional community.Your ePortfolio will be developed and hosted using Portfolium, the ePortfolio tool this university uses. As an Ashford student, not only will you have access to Portfolium during your time at Ashford, but you will retain lifetime unlimited access after leaving the university, without fees or capacity limit.For this activity, you begin developing your ePortfolio by creating an account using Portfolium. Use can also use the Portfolium button on your classroom left navigation to access Portfolium.If you already have a Portfolium account, skip to Step 2.Step 2: Initial Discussion Post*Share the link to your Portfolium in your initial post.*Discuss how you might use Portfolium to showcase your best work, help you obtain a job, and /or to highlight career achievements.*Discuss how your Portfolium can demonstrate your ability to deliver social and community services in health and human services or human services leadership. How could you demonstrate your ability to ensure ethical practices?*Your post should contain a minimum of 200 words. My career of choice is Guidance CounselorSee attachments Please answer both separately hhs497_discussion.docx required_resources.docx mhhs_case_study.docx Unformatted Attachment Preview Week 2 Discussion 1 Ethical Dilemmas Prior to beginning work on this discussion forum, review the MHHS Case Study and the two required chapters from the Knapp, VandeCreek, and Fingerhut book, Practical Ethics for Psychologists: A Positive Approach: Foundations of Ethical Behavior and Ethical Decision Making. Identify a minimum of one ethical dilemma that you have identified in the MHHS case study. Discuss the challenges you would face as a human services provider when dealing with this issue. How would you overcome these challenges? As you respond to this question consider how you would deal with this issue based on your future role in a human services organization. If you plan a direct service route vs. a leadership route how does this impact how you would approach the issue? Your post should contain a minimum of 400 words. SEE ATTACHMENTS FOR REQUIRED CHAPTERS AND CASE STUDY Discussion 2 (For this discussion you will focus on step 2: second, third, and fourth bullet Portfolium Prior to beginning work on this discussion forum, review the Portfolium materials listed below. Throughout this course you will build a personal electronic portfolio or “ePortfolio.” The ePortfolio tool will help you track your professional and academic progress. Once you graduate, it can also be used to demonstrate your skills and competencies to potential employers and the professional community. Your ePortfolio will be developed and hosted using Portfolium, the ePortfolio tool this university uses. As an Ashford student, not only will you have access to Portfolium during your time at Ashford, but you will retain lifetime unlimited access after leaving the university, without fees or capacity limit. For this activity, you begin developing your ePortfolio by creating an account using Portfolium. Use can also use the Portfolium button on your classroom left navigation to access Portfolium. If you already have a Portfolium account, skip to Step 2. Step 2: Initial Discussion Post • Share the link to your Portfolium in your initial post. • • • Discuss how you might use Portfolium to showcase your best work, help you obtain a job, and /or to highlight career achievements. Discuss how your Portfolium can demonstrate your ability to deliver social and community services in health and human services or human services leadership. How could you demonstrate your ability to ensure ethical practices? Your post should contain a minimum of 200 words. My career of choice is Guidance Counselor See attachments Please answer both separately Required Resources https://www.nationalhumanservices.org/ethical-standards Books Knapp, S. J., VandeCreek, L. D., & Fingerhut, R. (2017). Foundations of ethical behavior. In Practical ethics for psychologists: A positive approach (3rd ed., pp. 17–38). https://doi.org/10.1037/0000036-002 2 FOuNDATiONS OF ETHiCAL BEHAViOR People become psychologists for many reasons. A career choice, like many other choices, is probably overdetermined. Certainly, psychologists want employment that is interesting, pays enough, and has adequate working conditions. Nonetheless, another major reason for choosing any career is the opportunity to live out important ethical ideals (Martin, 2000). As such, most psychologists want a profession that allows them to live out their values. They want to integrate their personal commitments into their professional lives. Like others, psychologists have asked themselves, What is the good life? How should we live? What are our obligations to others? and What principles should guide our lives? Although few psychologists have taken up a comprehensive study of philosophical ethics, most of us have deliberated conscientiously on our personal ethical positions. Our values are often influenced by our religious or cultural backgrounds, guided by parents and other caregivers, 18 practical ethics for psychologists and altered through personal experiences. These values can become central to our self-concept. The search for clarifying personal and professional values can be enriched by looking at recent studies from the science of morality and also from the long and rich traditions of philosophical ethics. First, we selectively review findings from the science of morality, which sheds light on what actually influences our decisions and how we make them. Then, we look at philosophical traditions and their influence on our personal and professional values. THE SCiENCE OF MORALiTy Studies from the science of morality help elucidate factors that influence our decisions, for better or worse. From these studies we learn that (a) knowing what to do does not always translate into doing what we should do; (b) our mental architecture is not naturally suited to making impartial decisions; and (c) emotions play a major role in our actual decision-making process. Bernard and Jara (1986) studied the ability of graduate students to apply ethical principles of professional conduct. They presented participants with two hypothetical scenarios. in the first scenario, participants learn that a fellow graduate student is sexually involved with a client from practicum. in the second scenario, participants are told that a fellow graduate student’s alcohol abuse is negatively affecting his clinical competency. Participants were then asked to apply the American Psychological Association (APA; 2017) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (hereafter, Ethics Code) to identify what they should do to resolve the dilemma and specify what they would actually do if they were friends with this fellow graduate student. The results were surprising. With regard to the sexual scenario, 50\% said they would do exactly what they should do and 50\% said they would do less. in the problem drinking scenario, 45\% said they would do exactly what they should do and 55\% said they would do less. Bernard, Murphy, and Little (1987) later replicated this study with clinical psychologists. Although the percentage of participants who reported that they would do less than they should do was lower (37\% for the sexual scenario; 26\% for the problem drinking scenario), a sizable proportion of participants said that they would not uphold their ethical obligations to report a friend or colleague. The conclusion that one might draw from these studies is that simply knowing the rules of ethics is necessary but not sufficient for ensuring ethical practice. Another conclusion is that a more meaningful discussion of ethics within the practice of psychology must integrate a broader understanding Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution. foundations of ethical behavior 19 of human value systems and their influence on our decision making. These value systems generally correspond to a common morality or an intuitive sense of what is “good” and what is “bad.” Below, we review three lines of research in the science of morality that may help explain why it is sometimes very hard to do what is known to be right. Moral Foundations Theory One body of research on intuitive morality concerns Haidt’s moral foundations theory (Graham & Haidt, 2012), which identifies five central value systems that may be relevant to our understanding of what actually influences human behavior: 77 Care. Humans are motivated to care for others and avoid actions that would cause harm or suffering. This value is often expressed with the Latin phrase Primum non nocere, which translates as “First, do no harm.” 77 Fairness. Humans value reciprocity and cooperation in their relationships. This value is best exemplified in the Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you wish they would do unto you.” 77 Loyalty. Humans are loyal to groups with which they associate. They sacrifice their own interests for the benefit of their families, communities, and country. 77 Authority. Humans respect and abide by the wishes of higher status individuals (e.g., parents, government officials, spiritual leaders, police). 77 Sanctity. Humans value purity, cleanliness, and chastity in their behavior. This value is most associated with religious practices (e.g., Kosher laws) but can also be seen in current social practices (e.g., veganism). Haidt theorized that human beings are born with an innate sense of morality that becomes fine-tuned through our interactions with our environment. Moral learning occurs within a cultural context. All cultures subscribe to the five moral foundations to some degree, but the proportion of value placed on each foundation varies from culture to culture. For example, collectivist cultures may value loyalty and authority more than do individualist cultures. Those who follow orthodox religions may value sanctity more than do secular individuals. One can see the relevance of the moral foundations approach to our actual behavior. Haidt did not argue that moral agents should use these five factors in making their ethical decisions; he argued that they actually do use these five factors. These findings suggest some insights as to why psychologists Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution. 20 practical ethics for psychologists failed to do what was “right”—that is, turning in a colleague who appeared to be impaired from the abuse of alcohol. Perhaps these psychologists were overly influenced by notions of loyalty to a friend. Almost certainly, psychologists know of the highly publicized incident involving a football coach who was well known for high ethical standards yet failed to report his former colleague, who was suspected of child abuse. Perhaps loyalty to a former colleague influenced his decision. We have also read about allegations that certain psychologists deferred too much to some military authorities who wanted to use harsh interrogations (a euphemistic term for torture) and failed to object, object strongly enough, or pursue credible allegations of abuse. Perhaps deference to authority or loyalty to an institution influenced their decisions. The Role of Rational and Intuitive Thinking Models: Moral Dumbfounding Furthermore, Haidt (2001) stated that our moral decision making tends to be intuitive rather than reasoned. When faced with a moral dilemma, individuals automatically judge the situation as “good” or “bad” and use their reasoning to justify their already-made judgments. As an example, consider this moral dilemma that Haidt (2001) used in one of his studies: Julie and Mark are brother and sister. They are traveling together in France on summer vacation from college. One night they are staying alone in a cabin near the beach. They decide that it would be interesting and fun if they tried making love. At the very least it would be a new experience for each of them. Julie was already taking birth control pills, but Mark uses a condom too, just to be safe. They both enjoy making love, but they decide not to do it again. They keep that night as a special secret, which makes them feel even closer to each other. What do you think about that? Was it OK for them to make love? (p. 814) Most individuals who read this vignette judge Julie and Mark’s behavior as immoral. However, when asked to explain the reasoning behind their judgment, participants have difficulty finding a rational explanation to support their decision. is their incestuous behavior wrong because they might produce a baby with birth defects? No, the vignette explains that Julie and Mark used birth control. is their behavior wrong because it may cause stigma within their community? No, the vignette explains that Julie and Mark will not tell anyone that they made love. is their behavior wrong because it will cause a rift within their familial relationship? No, the vignette explains that Julie and Mark feel even closer to each other. Haidt coined the term “moral dumbfounding” to describe the experience that occurs when individuals are unable to justify their moral judgments through reasoning. When pushed to Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution. foundations of ethical behavior 21 find a rational explanation for the above vignette, many participants simply conclude, “i do not know why, but it’s just wrong!” Haidt further opined that we have two interacting systems for evaluating moral issues. System 1 (the dumbfounding system) operates automatically and instinctively. System 2, on the other hand, is slower to act, requires effort to activate, and is deliberative. Although not all researchers concur with the conclusions that Haidt drew from his studies (Royzman, Kim, & Leeman, 2015), we nonetheless find his conception of two systems of moral evaluations to be helpful when considering the ways that psychologists must respond to the situations they encounter. Perhaps some of the psychologists responding to the dilemmas presented by Bernard and Jara were using only System 1 (automatic, fast, and effortless) in formulating their response. Emotional Decision Making Emerging evidence supports the hypothesis that our emotions play an influential role in our decision making. This evidence can be seen in a classic set of experiments designed by philosophers Foot and Thomson (see review in Edmonds, 2014). Foot and Thomson presented participants with two moral dilemmas. in the first dilemma, a runaway trolley is headed down a track toward five people. Participants can save the five people from their death if they hit a switch that will divert the train toward another track, where it will kill one person. Participants are asked whether they would kill one person to save five. Most participants say that they would. in the second version of the dilemma, participants can save the five people from getting hit by the trolley by pushing a large stranger off a footbridge onto the track below. Most participants say that they would not push the stranger off the footbridge to save five others. What might explain the discrepancy of participants’ responses to the two dilemmas? Logic would dictate applying a cost–benefit analysis to both the trolley and the footbridge dilemmas. However, something gives participants pause when they have to be personally involved in killing a person, even a stranger, even though it would result in saving five lives. J. D. Greene and colleagues (2001) examined this discrepancy further. They asked nine participants to respond to 60 dilemmas while undergoing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRi) brain scanning. The dilemmas were characterized as either nonmoral, moral–impersonal, or moral– personal. fMRi results showed that areas of the brain associated with emotion (medial portions of Broadmann areas [BAs] 9, 10, 31, and 39) were more active when participants engaged in the moral–personal dilemmas compared with the nonmoral and moral– impersonal dilemmas. in addition, areas associated with working memory that are typically less active during emotional processing (BAs 46 and 7/40) were less active during the moral–personal Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution. 22 practical ethics for psychologists dilemmas when compared with the other two conditions. These results suggest that moral reasoning activates portions of the brain dealing with emotions. Moral dilemmas are not just abstract problems to be solved rationally; instead, they can involve very deep and intense emotions. Some have criticized these and other trolley studies for being too artificial and removed from real-life events. Nonetheless, the studies do show that making ethical decisions activates areas of the brain dealing with emotions. Such decisions can require considerable cognitive and emotional effort. FORMAL PHiLOSOPHiCAL SySTEMS The second source of guidance comes from the long, rich tradition of philosophical ethics. Formal philosophical systems have a place in a discussion about ethics because they can help to increase ethical acuity (or the ability to identify and clarify ethical issues; Tjeltveit, 1999), ground or justify ethical positions, or help psychologists make good decisions in situations in which their ethical obligations are not clear. Tjeltveit (1999) claimed that understanding moral foundations is necessary for psychologists who desire to reach high standards of conduct. Psychologists who have a clear sense of what they believe and why they believe it are more likely to make good ethical decisions. A well-trained psychologist can produce empathy statements even under considerable stress. Similarly, a well-trained psychologist can call on deeply held ethical schemas even during periods of considerable personal turmoil. We briefly review four philosophical systems (virtue ethics, utilitarianism, deontological ethics, and principle-based ethics) that appear particularly helpful to psychologists. Although philosophers have considered them in detail, these systems have more than theoretical or historical importance. Many of the terms and assumptions of these ethical systems have seeped into common culture and influence how people interpret everyday ethical situations. Although all ethical systems have their weaknesses, these systems have endured because of their coherence and usefulness in addressing ethical problems. This brief review can only touch the surface of these major philosophical traditions because each tradition has numerous subthemes, variations, and branches. These philosophical systems have important differences, but the differences should not be overemphasized. The systems often start in different places on an issue but end up in a similar location. They may appear highly dissimilar on the surface, but they lead to similar conclusions on most of the common ethical issues psychologists face. That is to say, they are consistent with the common morality. Only on the more technical or specific issues do they lead to differences in conduct. Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution. foundations of ethical behavior 23 We do not include self-interest as one of the philosophical systems reviewed here because it has never attracted a substantial following among philosophers or even the public in general. Respect for legitimate self-interest is an integral part of all of the philosophical systems reviewed. Certainly, pursuing one’s enlightened self-interest, if conducted appropriately, usually contributes to overall social welfare. Furthermore, self-interest as an overarching and comprehensive philosophical perspective lacks internal consistency. Persons who believe in self-interest as a comprehensive philosophy believe that the primary ethical obligation of all individuals is to promote their own welfare. However, to promote their own welfare to the fullest, they would have to argue that others should be altruistic toward them. in other words, they must argue against their own philosophical system to promote it. Most contemporary thinkers agree that feminism has a substantial influence on important current ethical issues, although not all would recognize it as a separate ethical system. Rather, adherents of feminism can be found among those who advocate virtue ethics or other philosophical systems. Feminism’s influence is especially important when considering issues dealing with fairness and abuse of power (e.g., Brabeck, 2000). Consequently, we do not discuss feminism as a separate ethical system but refer to feminist influences on ethical thinking as appropriate throughout this book. in the discussion that follows, we show an inclination toward principlebased efforts, but we rely on perspectives from other ethical theories when they appear useful. Virtue Ethics Whereas most ethical theories focus on a dominant principle of moral behavior, virtue ethics focuses on individual character. Virtues are character traits that have moral value. Aristotle was the first majo ... Purchase answer to see full attachment