Case Study One Worksheet: Respond To The Following Questions

Case Study One Worksheetrespond To The Following Questions 300 Words F

Case Study One Worksheet Respond to the following questions.

1. Why is this an ethical dilemma? Which APA Ethical Principles help frame the nature of the dilemma?

2. How might Dr. Romaro’s ambivalence toward the death penalty influence his decision to offer a forensic diagnosis of intellectual disability? How might John’s “confession” or his comment about the “boy waiting for the bus” influence the decision? To what extent should these factors play a role in Dr. Romaro’s report?

3. How are APA Ethical Standards 2.01f, 3.06, 4.04, 4.05, 5.01, 9.01a and 9.06 relevant to this case? Which other standards might apply?

4. What steps should Dr. Romaro take to ethically implement his decision and monitor its effect?

The case study is attached.

Paper For Above instruction

The ethical dilemmas faced by psychologists often involve complex considerations of professional standards, personal beliefs, and legal obligations. The case involving Dr. Romaro presents such a dilemma, primarily revolving around the decision to diagnose John with an intellectual disability for forensic purposes, which might influence his sentencing or treatment. This situation intersects various ethical principles outlined by the American Psychological Association (APA), especially with regard to integrity, justice, beneficence, and respect for persons (APA, 2017).

Is this an ethical dilemma?

Yes. The dilemma arises from the tension between ensuring an accurate and objective assessment for legal purposes and the personal and societal implications of labeling someone with an intellectual disability. Diagnosing John could potentially lead to reduced sentencing or different treatment within the criminal justice system, but it also raises concerns about the validity of the diagnosis, especially if influenced by Dr. Romaro’s personal biases or external pressures. The APA emphasizes that psychologists must prioritize objectivity and avoid misrepresentation (Standard 2.01f). Therefore, the core issue concerns balancing professional integrity with legal and moral responsibilities.

How might Dr. Romaro’s ambivalence influence his decision?

Dr. Romaro's personal feelings towards the death penalty and moral stance on justice may unconsciously impact his diagnostic judgment. An ambivalent attitude could lead to either overcompensating by diagnosing intellectual disability to prevent a death sentence or downplaying relevant information to facilitate a harsher outcome, depending on subconscious biases. Furthermore, John's “confession” and comment about “the boy waiting for the bus” might influence Dr. Romaro either toward skepticism or credence. Such anecdotal information may or may not be relevant, but ethically, psychologists need to focus on data that are reliable and valid, avoiding speculation that could bias the diagnosis. The diagnostic process should rely solely on evidence-based assessments rather than subjective impressions unless corroborated by standardized measures.

Relevance of APA Standards

Standards 2.01f (Integrity), 3.06 (Psychologists' responsibilities to protect confidentiality), 4.04 (Avoiding Harm), 4.05 (Disclosures), 5.01 (Third-Party Requests), 9.01a (Bases for Assessments), and 9.06 (Interpreting Assessment Results) all intersect in this case. For example, Standard 9.01a emphasizes that assessments should be supported by sufficient, relevant, and current information, while 4.04 and 4.05 highlight the importance of protecting vulnerable individuals and transparency. Additional applicable standards might include Standard 3.10 (Informed Consent) and Standard 4.03 (Representation of Findings), which ensure that assessments are conducted ethically and reports are accurate.

Steps for Ethical Implementation

Dr. Romaro should ensure that his diagnostic process adheres strictly to empirical and standardized assessment procedures, minimizing personal biases. He must document all procedures and data thoroughly, maintain transparency with the court about the basis for his diagnosis, and seek supervision or peer consultation if needed, especially given personal conflicts. Ongoing monitoring of the outcome and impact of his diagnosis is crucial, including follow-up evaluations and reflective practice to ensure his findings serve justice and ethical standards.

In conclusion, ethical adherence requires a balanced approach that respects the integrity of psychological assessment and prioritizes the well-being of the individual and societal justice. By following APA standards and engaging in reflective practice, Dr. Romaro can mitigate potential biases and uphold professional ethics in this complex case.

References

• American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. APA.
• American Psychological Association. (2010). Guidelines for Provider of Psychological Services. APA.
• Wrightsman, L. S., & Loeb, P. (2004). Handbook of Crime & Delinquency. SAGE Publications.
• Resnick, P. J. (2010). Ethical Challenges in Forensic Psychology. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40(6), 557-563.
• Chapman, S. (2011). Forensic Assessments in Criminal Courts. Routledge.
• Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological Evaluations for the Courts. Guilford Press.
• Hinshaw, S. P., & Scheffler, R. M. (2014). The ADHD Explosion: Myths, Medication, Money, and Today's Push for Performance. Oxford University Press.
• American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. (2014). Principles of Forensic Psychiatry. AAPL.
• Rogers, R. (2012). Clinical Assessment of Child and Adolescent Psychopathology. Guilford Press.
• Knapp, S. (2014). Forensic Psychology: From Theory to Practice. Routledge.