Ethical dilemmas frequently constitute an inevitable part of the decision-making process for individuals who are required to evaluate other people. In the scenario of Disparate Information for Evaluating Trainees, it is crucial to address the issue from the perspective of moral standards. This paper aims to approach the case study from the standpoint of APA Ethical Principles and provide recommendations on resolving the moral issue.
The case study scenario is an ethical dilemma since Dr. Vaji experiences ethical contradictions and faces the choice between two moral decisions. While the supervisor’s evaluation should be free from judgment based on external influence and other students’ opinions, an unaddressed issue poses a risk to the student’s professional behavior. APA Ethical Principles such as Standard 1 concerning ethical issues resolution, Standard 3 on human relations, and Standard 7 discussing education and training can help frame the nature of this dilemma (Jarden et al., 2019). Considering these principles can be beneficial in addressing the issue.
The APA Ethical Standards should be considered in regard to this case. In particular, standard 1.08 deals with individuals’ discrimination based on ethical complaints against them (Appelbaum et al., 2018). Standard 3.04 discusses avoiding harm and managing multiple relationships, which is relevant as the supervisor should minimize the avoidable impairment caused by Leo’s behavior. Standard 3.05 considers multiple relationships and requires the psychologist to refrain from numerous connections if it endangers objectivity. Standard 3.09 involves professional cooperation, and is relevant since Leo avoids collaboration with other students, impairing his professional qualities (Appelbaum et al., 2018). Standard 7.04 does not require students to reveal personal information, while standard 7.05 recommends mandatory individual or group therapy, which might benefit Leo, considering his intentionally deceiving behavior. Standard 7.06 is essential as it states that the evaluation should be based on the student’s actual performance on the program requirements. Other standards that might apply to the given scenario include 4.01 on maintaining confidentiality and 9.01 on the basis for assessments.
The supervisor’s alternative for resolving the ethical dilemma can be suspending the student from the role-playing exercise that advances his intolerant behavior toward ethnic minorities. Besides, having a discussion can help determine whether the student’s behavior is due to lack of integrity or a personality disorder. Holding a conversation is the alternative that best reflects the APA Ethics Code aspirational principles since it allows for avoiding harm and resolving the issue without personal information disclosure to others. The ethical theory guiding this decision involves the APA’s ethical principles enforceable on all stakeholders.
The steps that Dr. Vaji needs to take for implementing his decision should be consistent. The supervisor needs to use his communicative and negotiation skills and ensure that Leo is aware of the impact of his actions on clients. Besides, Dr. Vaji might increase the number of ethnic minority clients present on Leo’s sessions to provide him with more cases to reflect on. To monitor his decision’s effects, the supervisor can analyze the outcome of the decision taken and evaluate its consequences on Leo and his clients.
To conclude, applying the APA Ethical Principles to resolving the case study’s ethical dilemma was beneficial and allowed for developing the course action for the student’s supervisor. Considering the scenario from the moral perspective can help avoid the harmful effects on both parties. At the same time, prompt response to the situation and a comprehensive approach to the ethical issue can benefit the student and improve his professional competence.
References
Appelbaum, M., Cooper, H., Kline, R. B., Mayo-Wilson, E., Nezu, A. M., & Rao, S. M. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for quantitative research in psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board task force report.American Psychologist, 73(1), 3-25. Web.
Jarden, A., Rashid, T., Roache, A., & Lomas, T. (2019). Ethical guidelines for positive psychology practice.International Journal of Wellbeing, 9(3), 1-30. Web.