Legal and Ethical Dilemma 1

Lauren Vanden Bossche

Department of School Psychology, University of Arizona

SERP 696C: Law and Ethics in School Psychology

Dr. Buchsbaum

March 14, 2022

Legal and Ethical Dilemma 2

School psychology as a practice is susceptible to ethical dilemmas. Navigating the most

ethical route can be difficult, but as long as practitioners are current with the ever-changing

surrounding world and the ethical standards that they hold themselves to, it is not impossible.

With this, examining ethical wrong doings committed by others, can help practitioners apply

correct measures to take for potential future use. This essay will examine a case where there is an

ethical dilemma faced and will discuss how to better approach this issue and how it can be

prevented. In this case, the client and his family, was refused services by the school as they did

not have the accommodations and staff to provide him to the full extent of his educational rights.

The parent ultimately decided to pull the student from school all together and is now home-

schooling the child. In this paper, the dilemma to be examined is regarding a student with a

disability that cannot be accommodated by a school and the proceedings that are to take place

once this is determined.

In this ethical dilemma case, the circumstances need to be thoroughly explained therefore

appropriate suggestions regarding prevention and resolution can proposed. The client, under the

pseudonym of Chad, age 6, has a diagnosis of Level 3 Autism, which according to the DSM-5’s

diagnostic criterion, explain Chad has and will have difficulty with social interaction, both

expressive and receptive. Additionally, Chad will have deficits in Nonverbal communication,

pragmatic skills, restricted and or, repetitive patterns of behavior, and hyper/hypo sensitivity to

sensory input (IACC, 2022). There also is an intellectual impairment in congruency with the

Autism Diagnosis. Due to the level of severity, Chad’s IEP team after evaluations and testing

determine that the school is unequipped and cannot provide adequate educational services to

him. Chad’s father, listens to the meeting and hears, “we cannot accommodate your child”, gets
Legal and Ethical Dilemma 3

upset and pulls him from the district entirely. Since I was not present at the IEP, I cannot state if

there was a suggestion for a private placement, however, if there was, the parent was

misinformed, confused or a culmination of both.

Upon first glance, there are a plethora of ethical and legal issues present in this case.

Initially, the school psychologist on the team violated FAPE, IDEIA, LRE, APA Principle A and

Principle D and NASP Broad Principles I, III, and IV (APA 2020, Jacob et al., 2016, NASP

2020). Starting with the legal violations, the school psychologist denied this student of IDEIA

and FAPE, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Free and Appropriate Education Act,

which states all students aged 3-22 are entitled to a public school education regardless of their

disability. Under these laws, it is compulsory that all students, including those with disabilities

receive free education and appropriate education to meet their unique needs and prepare them

for the adult world (Jacobs et al.,2016). In addition, the school psychologist also violated the

student’s right to the Least Restrictive Environment, because her verbiage/suggestion/ the tone of

that meeting forced the parent to completely pull the student from the district.

In regard to the ethical violations, the school psychologist violated both APA and NASP

ethical standards. The APA standards that were violated in this case, are Principle A,

“Beneficence and Nonmaleficence” to which states that psychologists strive to benefit those

from who they work with and strive to not do any harm. In this case, by refusing the child

services and restricting the child’s educational rights, the psychologist is not benefitting nor

protecting the student from harm. By this client not receiving any educational services, the

student is being harmed and stripped of his rights. Principle D of the APA ethical standards

which states “Justice”, that all people are to benefit from the services of psychology (APA,
Legal and Ethical Dilemma 4

2020). Furthermore, the psychologist violated 3 of the 4 NASP principles, which include, Broad

theme I:Respecting the Dignity and Rights of All Persons, Broad theme III: Honesty and

Integrity in Professional Relationships and Broad Theme IV: Responsibilities to Schools,

Families, Communities, Society and the Profession (NASP 2020).

In this case, it can be difficult to determine what is the most appropriate decision for the

child, and a school psychologist may be conflicted because there are laws and ethical standards

to uphold that are contradictory to one another. On one hand, the child needs to be receiving

educational services and is entitled to all the accommodations for his disabilities, as long as they

are appropriate and are going to support him academically, socially, and emotionally during his

educational career. However, there is also the concern of providing those services with fidelity

and appropriately, which is where we see the dilemma come in.

Using the eight-step problem solving model, we can dissect the issue and come up with

the best decision for the student. Examining the parameters of the issue, looking at the potential

legal and ethical violations, which include inhibiting this student’s right to FAPE and conflicting

with ethical standards. Consulting with a legal team to seek a resolution, which may include

suggesting Private Placement within the SEA or LEA, that would be financially supported by the

district, if indeed there is no appropriate support within the school district. With this, evaluating

the student, their family, and school personnel’s rights and welfare, which would include

ensuring this is the LRE, and potential consequences with this decision, and determining if this is

what is the best outcome for the student. Finally, making the decision and sticking with it-which

includes giving the parents of the child the proper education on what the district is planning to

offer and how this would affect their child and their family. This last step, is where I believe the
Legal and Ethical Dilemma 5

psychologist ran into issues, by not being thorough and by not giving a comprehensive

explanation of the recommendation the team had come up with for their child, Chad (Jacobs et

al.,2016).

This is issue of not being transparent and not being thorough can cause many issues as we

see in preceding portion of the essay. This ethical dilemma and future dilemmas of this nature

can be avoided in many ways. Initially, by evaluating the services and levels that can be provided

by the district and seeing if there are solutions within the district. Additionally, by being honest

and sincere with the families and explaining their child’s and their rights, and their options in a

way that the family can understand. It is imperative that practicing psychologists are able to

convey results and suggestions in way that is digestible and comprehendible to parents;

especially those that may not have the ability or access to understand an advanced vernacular or

vocabulary.

To conclude, this dilemma will likely have negative impacts on this student and his

family, for years to come. It is important that we not only recognize when ethical (and legal)

violations are occurring, but we know the steps to take to avoid these unforeseeable issues. Part

of being a good psychologist is being aware and educated on the ethical and legal parameters of

our field, and that is what is going to make practice a safer place for all.
Legal and Ethical Dilemma 6

References

JOHN WILEY & SONS. (2022). Ethics and law for school psychologists.

American Psychological Association. (n.d.). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of

conduct. American Psychological Association. Retrieved March 14, 2022, from https://

www.apa.org/ethics/code

NASP 2020 professional standards adopted. National Association of School Psychologists

(NASP). (n.d.). Retrieved March 14, 2022, from certification/nasp-2020-professional-

standards-adopted

DSM-5 diagnostic criteria. IACC. (n.d.). Retrieved March 14, 2022, from https://iacc.hhs.gov/

about-iacc/subcommittees/resources/dsm5-diagnostic-criteria.shtml