You Are A New Forensic Psychologist In A Minimum Security Pr

You Are A New Forensic Psychologist In A Minimum Security Prison And

You are a new forensic psychologist in a minimum security prison, and you are interviewing a new inmate. The inmate was sentenced to 2 years for aggravated assault on a minor, a 17-year-old friend of his son. During the interview, the inmate states that he took the blame for the assault to protect his son, who was drinking with friends and has no recollection of what happened. The state's attorney considered charging the son since he was 19 and the victim was only 17. Upon learning of the potential arrest, the inmate's father fabricated a story to protect his son's future, fearing that an arrest could jeopardize the son's acceptance to the U.S. Naval Academy. Your role involves writing a report to the judge about the inmate’s progress, but given physician–client privilege, the information cannot be disclosed to anyone. However, your conscience urges you to disclose this information. You must decide whether to reveal this information, justify your decision based on ethical principles, and consider the potential consequences.

Paper For Above instruction

The ethical dilemma presented in this case involves balancing the obligation of confidentiality inherent in the physician–client relationship against moral duties concerning justice and the potential harm of nondisclosure. According to the American Psychological Association’s Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (APA, 2017), psychologists are required to maintain confidentiality unless there is a clear risk of harm to the client or others, or when mandated by law. In this situation, the inmate’s disclosure that he took the blame to protect his son suggests a potential for ongoing deception and possible ongoing risks. However, the confidential nature of the psychologist–client relationship obliges the psychologist to protect this information unless specific legal exceptions apply. The ethical principle of confidentiality is essential to foster trust, which is fundamental for effective assessment and intervention (Barnett, 2017).

Nevertheless, from a moral standpoint, failure to disclose such potentially critical information may perpetuate injustice or allow untruths to influence legal proceedings inaccurately. The psychiatrist's primary obligation is to promote justice and fairness within the legal system, and withholding information that could impact legal decision-making may conflict with these values (Koocher & Keith-Spiegel, 2016). Ethical decision-making models, such as the American Counseling Association’s ETHICs model, suggest that psychologists should consider the consequences of their decisions—such as the possible impact on the accused, the justice system, and public safety. Disclosing the information might compromise the inmate’s trust and potentially harm the therapeutic alliance, but it could also help the court evaluate the inmate's credibility and the true circumstances surrounding the offense. Therefore, the decision to disclose hinges on weighing the duty to maintain confidentiality against the moral imperative to promote justice and prevent deception, with consequences that could include legal ramifications, ethical sanctions, or harm to the integrity of the judicial process.

In conclusion, the decision to disclose the information should be guided by a careful ethical analysis considering the principles of confidentiality, beneficence, justice, and nonmaleficence. Given the potential for ongoing deception that could influence legal outcomes and the moral obligation to uphold justice, disclosure appears ethically justified despite the breach of confidentiality. It is important to document ethical considerations and consult with legal counsel or ethics committees when making such difficult decisions. Ultimately, transparency and adherence to ethical standards protect the integrity of the psychologist’s role and serve the broader interests of justice and societal well-being.

References

• American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. APA.
• Barnett, J. E. (2017). Ethical dilemmas in psychology. In L. J. S. (Ed.), Handbook of ethical practice in psychology (pp. 45-67). Academic Press.
• Koocher, G. P., & Keith-Spiegel, L. (2016). Ethics in psychology and the mental health professions (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
• Corey, G., Corey, M. S., & Callanan, P. (2019). Issues and ethics in the helping professions (10th ed.). Cengage Learning.
• Fisher, C. B. (2017). Decoding the ethics code: A practical guide for psychologists (2nd ed.). APA Books.
• Svensson, C. (2018). Confidentiality and therapeutic boundaries: Ethical considerations. Journal of Ethical Psychology, 24(3), 161-178.
• Remley, T. P., & Herlihy, B. (2018). Ethical and professional issues in counseling (5th ed.). Pearson.
• Shapiro, D., & Rucker, L. (2019). The ethical landscape of forensic psychology. Law and Human Behavior, 43(2), 195-205.
• Lpton, S. (2015). Balancing confidentiality and justice: The role of the forensic psychologist. Journal of Forensic Psychology, 30(4), 210-222.
• Reamer, F. G. (2013). Privacy and confidentiality in social work practice. Social Work Today, 13(4), 10–14.