Question 1

The ethical psychology definition refers to the norms that guide the behaviour of its members as
professionals. When evaluating what ethics in psychology entails, it's important to remember that
correct ethical practises are at the heart of psychology's application to research and therapy for
everyday people. This was not always the case before to 1953. Researchers may conduct studies that
are not ethical, resulting in significant long-term damage to individuals. For every psychologist who is
licenced under their domain, the American Psychological Association (APA) has its own Ethical
Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct.

For three reasons, ethical conduct in psychological research is critical. It safeguards the study's
participants, as well as the researcher and the discipline of psychology's reputation. The initial lines of
defence for this protection are the IRB and the APA code of ethics; nonetheless, there are four core
criteria for ethical studies. Beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and fairness are the four ethical
principles in psychology research. The term "beneficence" refers to a researcher's efforts to improve a
person or the subject of psychology. Nonmaleficence means "doing no damage" and ensuring that the
dangers to the participant are kept to a minimum. Autonomy empowers the researcher to make
informed choices and judgments about the study's direction.

A. The American Psychological Association's code of ethics is made up of core ideas and ethical
standards. The principles are meant to serve as a guide for psychologists in their professional
lives, whether they work in mental health, research, or business. The standards, on the other
hand, are expected behaviours that might result in professional and legal consequences if they
are not followed. Cherry, 2020, debated the four principals as follow. The first principle of the
American Psychological Association's (APA) ethical code is that psychologists should try to
defend the rights and welfare of individuals with whom they deal professionally (Conlin &
Boness, 2019). Clients they visit in clinical practise, animals used in research and studies, and
anybody else with whom they contact professionally are all included. This concept motivates
psychologists to seek to eradicate any biases, associations, or prejudices that may affect their
work. This involves doing research independently and avoiding enabling affiliations or
sponsorships to sway outcomes.

The second principles are fidelity and responsibility. According to the APA,
psychologists have an ethical obligation to ensure that others in their field follow high ethical
standards as well. This concept says that psychologists should engage in efforts that improve
their colleagues' ethical compliance and behaviour. This notion may be put into practise in a
variety of ways, including mentoring, peer review, and highlighting about ethical problems or
wrongdoing.
 Next is integrity. Psychologists should never try to deceive or mislead others in their
study or practise. Deception in research can take the form of faking or altering findings in
some way to attain desired results (Stark, 2010). In their work, psychologists should aim for
transparency and honesty. When deception is utilised in research (for example, by using
confederates or not fully disclosing the real nature of the study), psychologists must make
every effort to minimise the negative consequences. This form of deception in study must be
justified, and the benefits must exceed the risks. Deception should be used sparingly, should
not cause anguish, and should be exposed as soon as feasible.

The fourth principles are justice. Justice, in its widest definition, refers to the need to
be fair and balanced. People are entitled to access and profit from breakthroughs in the area of
psychology, according to this notion. It is critical for psychologists to engage everyone fairly.
Psychologists should always practise within their field of knowledge and be mindful of their
own abilities and limitations.

The last principles are people's dignity and rights are respected. Psychologists should
honour the individuality, dignity, and anonymity of persons with whom they deal
professionally (Smith, Holmberg, & Cornish, 2019). They should also work to reduce their
own prejudices and be aware of topics such as diversity and certain communities' concerns.
People may be concerned about their age, social situation, ethnicity, sexuality, culture,
ethnicity, or impairment, for example.

The Code of Conduct of the American Psychological Association goes into

considerably more detail than the broad principles, with several subsections describing how to
handle specific circumstances. Level of reliability, human relations, anonymity and privacy
problems, ethical advertising, establishing rates and keeping a record, training and education
requirements, difficulties that may emerge during research or while publishing a study, client
evaluation, and treatment are all included in the standards.

b. For someone who is very depressed, has bipolar illness, or is just going through a terrible
period, psychologists can be quite helpful. Unfortunately, a psychologist's negligence or
misbehaviour may result in injury to a vulnerable individual. The ramifications can be
disastrous. In many cases of psychological malpractice, the mental health practitioner fails to
pay attention to the patient's sickness symptoms. A negligence lawsuit might arise from a
failing to treat an individual, neglect of a suicidal patient, or an incorrect diagnosis. Below are
some possible reasons for malpractice suits.
First, self-disclosure that is excessive or inappropriate. While self-disclosure is often
utilised as a therapeutic approach, studies of MFCCs and psychologists show that more than
70% of them employ it at least sometimes. In many licencing board proceedings and civil
suits, self-disclosure is said to be excessive or improper. According to Novotney,(2016), there
are two factors to consider when determining whether or not a disclosure is morally correct:
(1) is it being revealed for the patient's or therapist's benefit, and (2) is it the sort of
communication that should be made to a patient with that mental disorder. If a patient has an
experience of child sexual abuse, for example, it may be permissible and acceptable to
mention that the therapist has a similar experience in order to develop empathy. It would be
improper, on the other side, if the patient has no such background and the therapist is giving
information due to the sheer therapist's personal concerns. "What does the disclosure assist in
the patient's therapy?" should always be the question.

Given a patient's personality and difficulties, some disclosures regarding the

therapist's past, family, or personal orientation may be inappropriate. Furthermore, therapists
must be aware that excessive self-disclosure might lead to a patient's belief that he or she is
special to the psychiatrist or that a relationship outside of the therapeutic relationship is
possible. When the patient inquires about the therapist's personal situation and/or connection
with his or her family and/or partners, the problem becomes more intense. At that time, the
therapist should inquire as to why the patient needs to know this information in the first place.

Secondly, relationships with patients in the workplace. There have been countless
cases where therapists have engaged into commercial connections with current or past
patients. There are just a few stories of such partnerships succeeding. In reality, practically
every time a commercial relationship is mentioned, it is usually in the context of a litigation,
or a public authority taken as a result of the business arrangement. Regardless matter how
profitable a possible business opportunity appears to be, a therapist must consider if it is
worth the risk of losing his or her job. The difficulty stems from the parties' inherent uneven
negotiating power once the therapeutic connection has been formed. It's nearly hard to prove
that a transaction was conducted at arm's length, no matter what legal terminology is
employed or what authorizations are signed. Most licencing boards will view entering into a
commercial connection with a current or former patient with scepticism, and the onus will be
on the psychiatrist to prove that there was no overreaching. Obviously, if the firm fails, the
burden of proof that no exploitation occurred becomes significantly larger. Unlike self-
disclosure, which is widespread, engaging into a commercial connection with a current or
former client should be avoided nearly entirely.

Thirdly, getting rid of the medical model. When faced with the complications of
voluntary participation, standard of care, and note-taking, some therapists have attempted to
avoid these obligations by claiming that they do not believe in or embrace the medical model,
 and hence should not be held to it. This is equivalent to notifying the Internal Revenue
Service that a psychologist do not feel the tax rules are valid and that individuals should not
be required to follow them. Though this may lead to the introduction of fascinating criminal
defence and insolvency lawyers, it will have no impact on the IRS's interpretation of the tax
laws' application. Similarly, a psychotherapist's assertion that he or she ought not be bound by
the medical paradigm is unhelpful. The standard approach will most likely be imposed on
them, whether they approve or not.

Lastly, inability to get peer consultation. Many psychotherapists make the mistake of
not getting a normal peer consultant or assessment group from which to get feedback. The
gradual isolation of therapists as a result of economic considerations has the potential to erode
clinical judgement. Peer consultation is one of the fastest ways to avoid a snare. Of course, if
a psychotherapist seeks a peer evaluation and then acts in the polar opposite of what the
consultant suggests, major consequences may result. Of course, if consultations are received,
they should be thoroughly documented. Peer consultations are one of the areas that experts
assessing cases look at when determining whether a therapist followed the standard of
treatment.

Psychiatrists should have a better awareness of the nuances of medical negligence

assessments than their nonforensic psychiatric counterparts due to their specific expertise and
training. The psychiatrist should improve his or her ability to focus on the proper legal
analysis and be more aware of flaws that prevent objective and correct conclusions. The
psychiatrist's thoroughness in misconduct case analysis should limit the inquiry to causative
aberrations, presumably diverting attention away from irrelevant medical routine.
Professional psychiatrists must be prepared mentally to police themselves if they are to avoid
relying on specialists regulating experts.

c. Confidential information is information created by someone who has a reasonable expectation

that it will only be shared with others with the explicit approval of the person who created it.
Unless the originating party specifies differently, information confidentiality is applicable
indefinitely. A therapist's and their client's therapeutic connection comprises a wealth of
sensitive information. This implies it can't be disseminated without the client's permission.
Confidentiality is a legal term that refers to information that individuals are exposed to
personally as well as secondhanded. In other words, if a psychologist handles a piece of
sensitive material without being specifically permitted to access or share the information, the
psychologist may be in violation of confidentiality. If confidentiality requirements are broken,
legal action can be taken against all parties engaged in the violation, with the exception of the
initiating party.

There are a few instances in which the standard standards of secrecy do not apply.
These exceptions to counselling confidentiality arise regularly, and therapists must be aware
of them since they are connected with important business procedures like charging. These
circumstances do not force the therapist to break confidentiality; rather, they apply to
instances where confidentiality is subject to controlled disclosures. Understanding the
distinction between these sanctioned breaches of confidentiality and cases where therapists
are required to disclose a violation is crucial to comprehending confidentiality in general.

When a client poses a danger to himself or others, one of the most usual possibilities
is for the therapist to warn the person in danger or someone who can keep the client safe.
Therapists frequently request hospitalisation for their clients in these situations. It's vital to
understand that if a client expresses suicidal thoughts, a therapist will not immediately violate
confidentiality. Before a client is assessed for hospitalisation, he or she must have a desire to
act on those ideas and have a precise suicide plan. A person will not be incarcerated against
their choice merely because they are seeking assistance.

If a therapist suspects a kid or disabled person is being harmed, they may be forced to
compromise client confidentiality. A counselor may have legitimate suspicions of abuse if a
kid has inexplicable injuries and acts afraid of their parent. They have a legal responsibility to
submit their concerns to authorities as a required reporter. A subpoena can be used to force
therapists to speak against their clients in exceptional situations. However, forcing a therapist
to testify is far more difficult than forcing a non-licensed mental health practitioner to testify.
The laws that regulate therapists are far tougher when it comes to confidentiality.

Of course, there are occasions when alerting clients about their disclosure is
inappropriate or useful, and if the psychologist has issues about this, they can speak with a
superior, coworker, or professional organisation. However, a legally forced exposure does not
even have to signify the termination of a therapeutic partnership or the loss of a client's trust
in their privacy in the future. Clients will feel more at ease in upcoming sessions with the
psychologist if they have a better understanding of confidentiality and its restrictions when
they first begin treatment.

2118 Words
References

Cherry, K. (2020, March 4). https://www.verywellmind.com/. Retrieved from APA Ethics Code
Principles and Standards: https://www.verywellmind.com/apa-ethical-code-guidelines-
4687465
Conlin, W. E., & Boness, C. L. (2019). Ethical considerations for addressing distorted beliefs in
psychotherapy. Psychotherapy, 56(4), 449–458.
Novotney, A. (2016). Five ways to avoid malpractice. Monitor on Psychology, 47(3), 56.
Smith, R.D., Holmberg, J., &Cornish J.E. (2019). Psychotherapy in the #MeToo era: Ethical
issues. Psychotherapy (Chic). ;56(4):483-490

Stark, L. (2010), The science of ethics: Deception, the resilient self, and the APA code of ethics,
1966–1973. Journal of Historical and Behaviour Science, 46: 337-370