The American Psychological Association (APA), Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct applies to professional psychologists and other professionals in the field of psychology. Therefore, Dr. John Smith must abide by the APA Ethics Code as his primary code of ethics, especially as an individual with a private practice and no additional code of ethics from an organization or overhead. Additionally, there are other codes Dr. Smith may consider due to his specialization in the treatment of truck drivers with active chemical dependence. Dr. Smith should also consider The National Association for Addiction and Drug Abuse Counselors (NAADAC) Code of Ethics among other resources including the Code of Federal Regulations and the United
…show more content…
Smith is a professional psychologist and over half of his clients are truck drivers with active chemical dependency. Many of his clients have been recommended to him by previous clients. Due to confidentiality purposes, Dr. Smith does not report any of the clients and he does not keep record of his clients’ chemical dependency on file. Since the majority of his clients has not previously sought help for chemical dependency in fear of being reported and losing their jobs, Dr. Smith believes that by protecting confidentiality he can reach those who otherwise would not seek help. Although Dr. Smith believes he is morally justified, if his clients are driving while under the influence, especially commercial vehicles for work which have the potential to create greater damage due to vehicular size, then his confidentiality policy is not morally justified. The APA Code of Ethics, the NAADAC Code of Ethics, and researcher and educator Monique Manhal-Baugus in her article, “Confidentiality: The Legal and Ethical Issues for Chemical Dependency Counselors” all emphasize confidentiality except when the client poses risk of harm to others or themselves. Both of the Codes of Ethics leave this up to the professional’s interpretation, but Monhal-Baugus (1996) clearly states professionals have a duty to warn and breach confidentiality, even if there is no specific …show more content…
Smith’s policy of confidentiality is morally justifiable. If he files a report that his clients have broken Federal Regulations (2016), trust will be compromised and clients could discontinue counseling sessions. The federal regulations in question include the Code of Federal Regulations (2016), specifically Tittle 49, section 382.201 that states “No driver shall use alcohol while performing safety-sensitive functions” and section 382.213, “No driver shall report for duty or remain on duty requiring the performance of safety sensitive functions when the drivers uses any drug substances. . .” If Dr. Smith’s clients believe he is untrustworthy, then they will not recommend him to other chemically dependent truck drivers, less individuals will be treated, and the potential threat of harm to chemically dependent truck drivers and others will remain or even potentially increase. It is a quandary because whether he is effective in treating clients may depend on the individual client. How clients react to Dr. Smith breaking confidentiality to get them additional help, from a trained professional in that specific area may determine Dr. Smith’s effectiveness in his
Smith is a professional psychologist and over half of his clients are truck drivers with active chemical dependency. Many of his clients have been recommended to him by previous clients. Due to confidentiality purposes, Dr. Smith does not report any of the clients and he does not keep record of his clients’ chemical dependency on file. Since the majority of his clients has not previously sought help for chemical dependency in fear of being reported and losing their jobs, Dr. Smith believes that by protecting confidentiality he can reach those who otherwise would not seek help. Although Dr. Smith believes he is morally justified, if his clients are driving while under the influence, especially commercial vehicles for work which have the potential to create greater damage due to vehicular size, then his confidentiality policy is not morally justified. The APA Code of Ethics, the NAADAC Code of Ethics, and researcher and educator Monique Manhal-Baugus in her article, “Confidentiality: The Legal and Ethical Issues for Chemical Dependency Counselors” all emphasize confidentiality except when the client poses risk of harm to others or themselves. Both of the Codes of Ethics leave this up to the professional’s interpretation, but Monhal-Baugus (1996) clearly states professionals have a duty to warn and breach confidentiality, even if there is no specific …show more content…
Smith’s policy of confidentiality is morally justifiable. If he files a report that his clients have broken Federal Regulations (2016), trust will be compromised and clients could discontinue counseling sessions. The federal regulations in question include the Code of Federal Regulations (2016), specifically Tittle 49, section 382.201 that states “No driver shall use alcohol while performing safety-sensitive functions” and section 382.213, “No driver shall report for duty or remain on duty requiring the performance of safety sensitive functions when the drivers uses any drug substances. . .” If Dr. Smith’s clients believe he is untrustworthy, then they will not recommend him to other chemically dependent truck drivers, less individuals will be treated, and the potential threat of harm to chemically dependent truck drivers and others will remain or even potentially increase. It is a quandary because whether he is effective in treating clients may depend on the individual client. How clients react to Dr. Smith breaking confidentiality to get them additional help, from a trained professional in that specific area may determine Dr. Smith’s effectiveness in his