Ethical standards and principles of psychologists

Ethical Standards and Principles of Psychologists Author’s Name The Institutional Affiliation Course Number and Name Instructor Name Assignment Due Date Table of Contents TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u Introduction PAGEREF _Toc180614416 \h 3Section 1 - Dr. Green and Carla PAGEREF _Toc180614417 \h 3Ethical Principles PAGEREF _Toc180614418 \h 3Ethical Standards PAGEREF _Toc180614419 \h 3Section 2 - Dr. Green and Carla's Sister PAGEREF _Toc180614420 \h 4Ethical Principles PAGEREF _Toc180614421 \h 5Ethical Standards PAGEREF _Toc180614422 \h 5Section 3 - Dr. Green and Other Clients/Persons PAGEREF _Toc180614423 \h 6Ethical Principles PAGEREF _Toc180614424 \h 6Ethical Standards PAGEREF _Toc180614425 \h 7Conclusion PAGEREF _Toc180614426 \h 8References PAGEREF _Toc180614427 \h 9 Introduction Through this analysis of Dr. Green's practice, the paper explores a series of ethical dilemmas regarding the licensed psychologist. Therefore, the paper investigates how a doctor deals with three situations using the American Psychological Association (APA) Code of Ethics to identify, understand, and resolve the ethical dilemmas created. Section 1 - Dr. Green and Carla For Dr. Green and Carla, a few ethical principles and standards from the APA Code of Ethics are particularly implicated. Ethical Principles As per Young and Kenny (2023), beneficence and Non-maleficence specify that psychologists must contribute to the well-being of those with whom they work, not induce harm. Dr Green attempts both in his provision of misleading information about his areas of competence concerning his treatment of gender-related and eating disorder issues. Fidelity and responsibility highlight psychologists' responsibilities to uphold a profession and the public. Dr Green's deception of his qualifications violates this trust by deceiving not only Carla but also the professionalism of his profession. Integrity means accuracy, honesty, and truthfulness in psychology's science, teaching, and practice. Dr. Green's initial pretenses of ability disregard this principle by setting an unethical therapeutic relationship. Ethical Standards From the standpoint of Ethical Standards, Dr. Green's conduct raises several ethical concerns (APA, 2017). Standard 3.04 - Dr Green's deception about his therapeutic competencies is directly risky to Carla because it risks heading her therapy away from appropriate interventions and delays effective ways out of her disorders (Watts et al., 2023). Standard 3.01 - This can be viewed as an ambivalent standard, allowing the evaluation of whether Dr. Green's rejection of Carla as a client was motivated by his previous relationship with her sister or discriminatory behavior that was not linked to therapeutic concerns but to his extracurricular affairs. Standard 5.01 - Dr. Green's professional advertisement claims expertise in fields that he later cannot claim competence in when dealing with unmet client needs, which is patently a violation of this standard (Shapiro, 2024). This false advertising could misstate to clients what services they can receive and can impact their healthcare choices. Standard 10.01 - Informed Consent to Therapy sets the stage regarding what the client can expect and understand about the therapy process during informed consent. In that case, Green's misleading assertions regarding his qualifications can have compromised the effectiveness and trustworthiness of that consent. Standard 4.05 - Dr. Green helped maintain the confidentiality of his past inappropriate relationship with Carla's sister, but according to his behavior, he did not handle disclosures well. Regarding legal concerns, under consumer protection laws, Dr. Green could be fined for misleading advertising practices, but the penalties for Dr. Green could also include suspension or revocation of his psychological license (Bonsu, 2020). These are designed to uphold integrity and trust in healthcare professions. He was representing one's professional qualifications as fake, resulting in legal penalties such as lawsuits for malpractice or fraud. Dr Green's ethical situation requires consideration from the standpoint of rigorous self-reflection. Section 2 - Dr. Green and Carla's...