Ethical Dilemmas in Psychology Practice

Running head: PSYCHOLOGY ASSIGNMENT
PSYCHOLOGY ASSIGNMENT
Name of the student
Name of the University
Author Note

1PSYCHOLOGY ASSIGNMENT
The respective essay is introspection, analysis, comparison and contrast of the ethical
dilemmas that a psychologist can face in his/her psychological practice days with the help of
certain parameters to compare and contrast ethical dilemmas such as two ethical decision making
models, for instance, the 8 step Koocher and Keith-Spiegel (2008) model and James Rest’s
ethical decision making model.
A psychological practitioner is always suggested to be an unprejudiced observer while
treating his/her patients throughout their career. It is evident that a psychiatrist or a psychological
counselor or an analyst needs to be an unprejudiced observer in order to understand the situation
of the patients and the reasons behind their psychological disturbances (Copeland, 2013). A good
therapist is a person who does not judge his/her patients, rather, listens to his/her problems
carefully and empathetically with critical analysis to provide relief and solutions to his/her
patients. However, there are certain cases in psychoanalysis that leads to certain ethical
dilemmas faced by the psychologists (Rodolfa et al., 2013).
The most customary form of ethical dilemma a psychologist faces is the act of breach of
privacy between him/her and the client. However, it has to be understood that in certain very rare
cases, when there is no option rather than disclosing everything to the people concerned, such
ethical dilemmas are bound to happen. For example, the cases of clients falling prey to
depression, anxiety and going through a process of self-harm which includes cutting off veins
and hands can escalate to homicide or suicide, an untimely death. In order to save the client from
the hands of death, the psychologist might sometimes disclose the secret to the client’s family so
that the family might be able to provide additional aid to the client while he/she is at home. The
second most important ethical dilemma a psychologist faces is the perils of dual relationship.
Often the psychologist, in order to provide speedy treatment to his/her clients, gets into a dual

2PSYCHOLOGY ASSIGNMENT
relationship with their clients, which is, a professional relationship and the other is an emotional
relationship (Burman, 2016). In such case, the psychotherapist and the patient develops a jovial
and amicable or friendly relationship between both of us which would focus more on emotions
and sentiments, especially for the clinically and massively depressed clients. However, it has to
be remembered that there is a thin line between the dual relationship; professional and emotional
relationship. However, with the limitations comes exploitation. It is unfortunate and undesirable
from the therapist’s part to provide the patient with over-indulgence because the patient becomes
completely emotionally dependent on the therapist during the time of his therapy, which can lead
to undesired behavior of the patient that hampered his well being (McDaniel et al., 2014).
Therefore, the two cases of ethical dilemma that can be faced by a psychotherapist taken in the
respective assignment is: Breach of privacy and dual relationship.
To compare and contrast the two ethical decision making models, I have chosen step Koocher
and Keith Spiegel Model of ethical decision making and James Rest’s ethical decision making
model in psychology.
Under the Koocher and Keith Spiegel Model of ethical decision making, there has
been eight steps enumerated throughout the whole decision making process and implementation
strategies (Lane, 2013). The first step is describing the parameters of the situation (the unethical
situation or the ethical dilemma the psychologist is going through), analyzing it in order to
understand the magnanimity or the triviality of the situation in micro as well as macro aspects
(Edelwich & Brodsky, 2013). The second step includes understanding the potential of the ethical
and legal issues involved in the case and the significance of such issue (Heyler, et al., 2016). The
third step includes consulting ethical‐legal guidelines, if any; already available that might apply
to the resolution of each issue (Roberts & Uhlmann, 2013). The fourth step includes rights,