1

Ethical Decision-Making Process

Caitlyn Belcher and McKenna Hoole

RECTH 5350

December 1st, 2021

 2

Abstract

Ethical questions can be hard to answer as individuals all have personal belief systems

that govern their decisions. This paper introduces an ethical dilemma following an incident at a

rockwall with a student’s harness breaking. Readers will follow an ethical decision making

process as the writers attempt to work through the issue and how it relates to the American

Therapeutic Recreation Association’s (ATRA) Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice.

Keywords: ethics, climbing, summer camp, recreation therapy, ATRA, standards of

practice, code of ethics, decision-making model

 3

Description of Ethical Scenario

At a summer camp in Northern Utah, employees are responsible for providing outdoor

experiences for groups that come to stay at the camp. An employee running the rockwall is

responsible for belaying students and making sure they are properly harnessed and wearing the

correct safety equipment. One employee during a shift at the climbing wall was getting to know

one of the students. This student was outgoing and loved to climb. While the student and

employee were socializing, the student clipped the rope onto his harness himself instead of

letting the employee do it. The employee then did not check to make sure the harness was

properly clipped onto the rope and locked. At the top of the climbing wall, the student’s harness

loop that was hooked to the rope broke, leaving the student 40 feet off of the ground without

being clipped in. The employee quickly asked another employee nearby to climb up the

backside of the wall to the top platform and clip the student back in. The second employee was

able to get to the top to clip the student in before he became fatigued and fell from the top of the

wall. The first employee belayed the student to the ground and realized the student had clipped

the rope to the wrong loop on the harness; he attached the clip to the loop that is designed to hold

a chalk bag, not the weight of a body. The employee decided not to tell his supervisor the

mistake that he made since everything turned out fine and no one got hurt. The second employee

also did not mention the situation to the supervisor because the employee asked them not to.
 4

Decision-Making Model

Identify the Behavior

The first behavior in question in this scenario is the employee not checking to make sure

the harness was properly clipped in before he allowed the student to begin climbing the wall.

The second behavior in question is that both employees then did not inform the supervisor of the

incident that occurred because of the mistake. Both of these behaviors are ethically questionable

and will be considered.

Determine Professional Relevance

This behavior does pertain to the professional/business role because the behavior in

question contradicted the professional requirement of the employee. Employees at the camp are

required to provide safety and reliability when running the outdoor programs; this means

employees must have integrity and consistency in checking the environment and safety

equipment. This incident would affect that employee’s working relationship and reliability as a

member of the program staff.

Additionally, failure to report the safety incident to the supervisor is an issue that presents

itself in the working relationship. Both employees had an obligation to let the supervisor know

the situation and the legal risks associated. Because both employees failed to inform the

supervisor, any legal actions taken by the student involved and/or their associated group at the

camp would have been a surprise to the supervisor.

 5

Differentiate Personal and/or Professional Ideals and Values

It is possible that personal ideals and values could get in the way of a professional

judgement of this scenario. A personal belief could be that the supervisor should be informed of

the incident because it was both a safety risk for the student and a legal risk for the camp.

However, because no one was harmed in the end and the situation was quickly resolved, it can

also be argued that the employees had no obligation to tell the supervisor what happened. A

personal belief might get in the way of making a sound professional judgement call

Consider Legal Duties

There is no technical law or judicial violation that is being broken in this situation.

However, the employee has a duty to fill out an incident report form even if no physical harm

occurred. He also has a duty to provide competent care as a trained professional to ensure the

safety of the individuals he serves.

Assess Ethical Obligations

Atra Code of Ethics

Principle 1: Beneficence

This principle of the ATRA code of ethics states that personnel should provide well-

being by maximizing benefits and minimizing personal harm. This scenario is a violation of this

principle because the employee did not take every action to ensure the safety of the participant

and instead he prioritized convenience over safety.

 6

Principle 2: Non-Maleficence

This principle states the obligation of Recreational Therapy personnel to use their

knowledge and skills to protect participants from harm. Similarly to the principle above, this

principle was violated because the employee did not successfully use his knowledge and skill set

to protect the participant from harm; rather, he neglected to utilize his knowledge of the safety

equipment and instead allowed the student to use their own knowledge resulting in a safety issue.

Principle 3: Autonomy

This principle states that a recreational therapy professional has a duty to protect the right

of an individual to make their own choices, and the duty to respect and honor that right of the

participant. In this scenario, autonomy does not play a huge role. The participant was given the

freedom to choose that he wanted to participate in the rock climbing activity; however, after that

choice has been made it is then up to the Recreational Therapy professional to facilitate the

activity safely and ethically.

Principle 4: Justice

This principle states that each individual is served equally and fairly. While the student

in this scenario was not treated differently based on race, color, creed, gender, sexual orientation,

age, disease/disability, or social and financial status, they were not treated equally in regards to

the proper amount of safety and instruction that the other participants received during this

activity.
 7

Principle 5: Fidelity

This principle states, “Recreational Therapy personnel have an obligation, first and

foremost, to be loyal, faithful, and meet commitments made to persons receiving services. In

addition, Recreational Therapy personnel have a secondary obligation to colleagues, agencies,

and the profession” (ATRA Code of Ethics). This scenario is an example of how this principle

was violated and how professionals can fail to inform colleagues and supervisors about an issue

in practice.

Principle 6: Veracity

This principle states that Recreational Therapy personnel should be truthful and honest

and avoid omitting the truth. By choosing not to share with his supervisors what happened on the

rockwall, he is being dishonest and omitting the actual events of that therapy session. The co-

worker could also be looked at for being dishonest as they were there when the accident

happened.

Principle 7: Informed Consent

This principle states that, “Personnel are responsible for providing each individual

receiving service with information regarding the services, benefits, outcomes, length of

treatment, expected activities, risk and limitations, including the professional’s training and

credentials” (ATRA Code of Ethics). The student was provided details of the session and chose

to freely participate with this knowledge. However, the employee did not provide competent

services according to his training.

 8

Principle 8: Confidentiality and Privacy

This principle states that Recreational Therapy personnel must disclose all relevant

information to individuals seeking services. This includes not disclosing confidential, personal

information to third parties. There was no violation of this principle in the ethical scenario.

Principle 9: Competence

This principle states Recreational Therapy personnel have an obligation to maintain

credentials and should improve their knowledge of the RT profession in order to competently

serve individuals. The employee in question did not display competence in the situation. He did

not check the harness and follow protocol, placing the student in harm’s way.

Principle 10: Compliance with Laws and Regulations

This final principle states that, “personnel are responsible for complying with local, state

and federal laws, regulations and ATRA policies governing the profession of Recreational

Therapy” (ATRA Code of Ethics). The employee failed to follow safety protocols for the facility

that may extend to local, state, and federal laws.

Determine Action

Following the incident the employee who failed to check the harness should have

reported the incident to his supervisor and filled out an incident report form. He also asked his

co-worker not to share any details of the incident which may be compromising that co-worker’s

values. The co-worker should ask the employee to share with their supervisor what happened

during that session. If the employee refuses to tell the supervisor, the co-worker could report to

the supervisor themselves. The co-worker could keep the situation general, not mentioning any
 9

names and breaking the confidence of the employee, but should alert the supervisor to the

problem. The supervisor could then hold a training session to refresh all employees on safety

protocols.

Connections to Standards of Practice

The ATRA Standards of Practice improve the quality of care Recreational therapists

provide. It also tests the consistency and reliability of the services provided. The ethical scenario

put into question five of the twelve standards. Standard 6 is prevention, safety planning and risk

management. More could have been done in the scenario to reduce the safety risk of the student

and the co-worker if the employee had properly checked the harness. This also calls into question

Standard 9: Staff Qualifications and Competency Assessment. The employee did not

demonstrate competency as they allowed the student to climb without first checking the harness

himself. It is an opportunity for competency development especially if a facility-wide training is

provided on safety. Standard 10: Quality Improvement and Standard 11: Resource Management

are also applicable in this situation. Continuous training and review would allow for the

employee to improve the quality of care they provide. Checking and double checking the harness

before and after a session ensures that the harness is safe for use. It should also be checked by a

qualified individual before a student climbs. Standard 7: Ethical Conduct has previously been

reviewed according to the ATRA Code of Ethics.

 10

References

Code of Ethics. ATRA. (n.d.). Retrieved November 24, 2021, from https://www.atra-

online.com/general/custom.asp?page=Ethics.

Standards of Practice. ATRA. (n.d.). Retrieved November 24, 2021, from https://www.atra-

online.com/general/custom.asp?page=SOP.