Words For Qs1 And 100 Words Of Response To Each Discussion ✓ Solved

100 Words For Qs1 And 100 Words Of Response To Each Discussion Forumqs

Identify a relevant current ethical or compliance standard from the latest ethical or compliance code, cite and reference it properly, and explain its relevance to lobbying or being a mental health advocate.

Discuss the difference between lobbying for legislative issues and advocating for individual clients in mental health, including ethical standards that guide these practices, with examples and references.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Ethical and compliance standards in mental health advocacy and lobbying

One pertinent current standard is the American Psychological Association’s (2017) Standard 3.04, Avoiding Harm. This emphasizes that psychologists must avoid inflicting physical or mental suffering, which directly relates to mental health advocacy. When advocating for clients, practitioners are ethically obliged to consider if their actions promote the client’s best interest without causing harm. In lobbying, this standard reminds advocates to promote laws that prevent harm at a societal level, such as policies improving access to mental health services. Ethical standards like this ensure both individual and collective advocacy efforts remain aligned with the core principle of do no harm, thus safeguarding client well-being while influencing policy (American Psychological Association, 2017).

Meanwhile, the National Organization for Human Services’ (2015) Standard 12 underscores the importance of being aware of relevant laws and advocating for legal reforms that serve clients ethically. For example, a human service professional may lobby for legislation to improve mental health parity or funding. This standard guides practitioners to ensure their advocacy aligns with legal frameworks, but also highlights the potential conflicts when laws are unjust, necessitating ethical vigilance. Both standards emphasize the importance of ethical responsibility, whether working directly with clients or influencing broader legislation, to maintain integrity and prioritize clients’ rights and well-being (National Organization for Human Services, 2015).

Differences between legislative lobbying and individual client advocacy in mental health

Legislative lobbying involves influencing policymakers to enact or amend laws affecting mental health policies or services for large populations. It requires engaging with lawmakers, organizing campaigns, and advocating for systemic change. Conversely, individual client advocacy focuses on supporting a specific person's needs, through efforts such as assisting with paperwork, communicating with healthcare providers, or addressing immediate social needs. Ethical standards, like the N.O.H.S.’s Standard 12, stress awareness of legal boundaries and advocacy within those confines. Both approaches aim to improve mental health outcomes but differ in scope and methods: lobbying targets systemic change, while client advocacy seeks immediate, personalized benefits (National Organization for Human Services, 2015; Hall & Reynolds, 2012).

For example, lobbying for mental health parity legislation aims at broad change, whereas helping a client navigate social security benefits addresses an individual’s current hardship. Despite their differences, both practices must adhere to ethical standards ensuring that advocacy actions promote clients’ best interests without causing harm. Engaging in both types of advocacy requires understanding legal and ethical frameworks to ensure actions are responsible and effective in advancing mental health rights and services (Kusserow, 2014). Ultimately, coordinated efforts between systemic lobbying and individual advocacy foster comprehensive mental health support.

References

  • American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. https://www.apa.org/ethics/code
  • Hall, R. L., & Reynolds, M. E. (2012). Targeted Issue Advertising and Legislative Strategy. The Journal of Politics, 74(3), 888–902.
  • Kusserow, R. P. (2014). Metrics to Evidence and Benchmark Compliance Program Effectiveness. Journal of Health Care Compliance, 16(6), 49-52.
  • National Organization for Human Services. (2015). Ethical Standards for Human Services Professionals. https://www.nationalhumanservices.org/ethical-standards
  • Nguyen, D. (2010). The Health Care Reform Bill: Compliance Implications for Behavioral and Mental Health Services. Journal of Health Care Compliance, 12(4), 11–61.
  • Rothenberg, R. (1992). Lobbying and Political Influence. Journal of Public Policy, 12(3), 159-174.
  • Wright, J. (1996). The Role of Advocacy in Health Policy. Health Affairs, 15(1), 22-30.
  • Austen-Smith, D., & Wright, J. (1994). Strategic voting and the influence of lobbyists. American Journal of Political Science, 38(4), 1020-1040.
  • Nguyen, D. (2010). The Health Care Reform Bill: Compliance Implications for Behavioral and Mental Health Services. Journal of Health Care Compliance, 12(4), 11-61.
  • Hall, R. L., & Reynolds, M. E. (2012). Targeted Issue Advertising and Legislative Strategy. The Journal of Politics, 74(3), 888–902.

Related Assignments