Module 2 Flashcards
1
Q
What is the difference between Teleological and Deontological approaches?
A
-
Ancient Greek ethics roots: Ethics has roots in ancient greek philosophy.
- Socrates: Rational reflection and good to community
- Plato: Virtue ethics and phronesis (practical wisdom)
- Aristotle: intellectual virtues and good character lead to ‘Eudaimonia’
-
Teleology (Consequentialism approach): actions are judged by their outcomes
- eg utilitarianism
-
Deontology (Intention-based approach): actions are judged by adherence to duty or principles
- eg Kant, religion, professional obligations
- Inherent right and worng
2
Q
What does Taylor (2015) outline as the pros and cons of the three main streams of ethical theory?
A
-
Consequentialism/Utilitarianism (or rule-based consequentialism) eg Mill
- Consequences (or value of consequences) may be unclear
- Action could produce both good and bad effects (for same or different people)
- Allows morally permissable murder
-
Deontology: Required to fulfil ethical obligations eg Kant’s categorical imperatives.
- Kant; no one can be used as a tool (even to help)
- Hugely rigid/Permits no exceptions (Kant universality)
- Must consider consequences to rank rules
-
Virtue Ethics: Increase morality will naturally increase moral action eg Aristotle.
- Practical Wisdom (need for growth and active reasoning) Eudamonia (human flourishing)
- No real guide
3
Q
What are Forsyth’s four ethical ideologies?
A
- Four categories across two dimensions:
- Idealism: acceptance of harm
- Relativism: acceptance of moral absolutes
-
Situationalism: High idealism, High relativism
- Reject absolute moral rules, believe good consequences can be obtained
-
Absolutism: High idealism, Low relativism
- Accept absolute moral rules, good consequences can be realised
-
Subjectivism: Low idealism, High relativism
- Reject moral absolutes, make judgements based on personal feelings
-
Exceptionalism: Low idealism, Low relativism
- Accept moral absolutes as desirable, but exceptions are permissable
4
Q
What were the results of Hadjistavropoulos et als study on psychologists and physicians ethical outlook?
A
- Psych’s less relativistic than physicians (but not much)
- Psychologists equally idealistic as physicians
- More psychologists were absolutists and more physicians were situationists
- Psychologists were more influenced by their code of ethics and less by family views, religious background, and peer attitudes
- There were no significant differences based on sex
5
Q
What is Ross’s Prima Facie Duty Theory?
A
- Moral intuitions are judgements about how an individual should act in a particular situation
- Seven duties form basis of relationship between psychologist and client
- Fidelity, Reparation, Gratitude, Justice, Beneficience, Non-maleficience, Self-improvement
6
Q
What behaviours did Sullivan (2002) find were universally agreed upon as ethical and unethical?
A
- Universal (>90% agreement) compared to Pope’s study
- Ethical:
- Using clients first name
- Having them use your first name
- Accepting handshakes
- Unethical:
- Erotic or sexual interactions with client
- Borrowing money from client
- Discussing client by name with friends or to a class
- Disrobing in front of client
- Signing off on hours that havent been done
- Conducting therapy while drunk
7
Q
What behaviours did Sullivan identify as having a mismatch being rates being done and ethical judgement?
A
- Unquestionably unethical but not rare
- Signing for hours supervised not earned
- Disclosing client’s name to a class
- Behaviour rare but not unquestionably unethical
- Telling a client: I am sexually attracted to you
- Lending money to a client
- Kissing a client
- Giving a gift over $50 to a client
- Accepting aclient’s invitation to a party
- Unintentionally disclosing confidential data
- Providing services outside area of competence
- Engaging in a sexual fantasy about aclient
- Common but not unquestionably ethical
- Using self-disclosure as a therapy technique
- Unquestionably ethical but not common
- Nil
8
Q
What considerations did Sullivan (2002) note as caveats to result interpretation?
A
- No measure of why behaviours were rated as ethical/unethical
- Psychologists who did not respond to survey may have differing opinions
- Half sample from SA or WA
- Majority were clinical or counselling
- Possible discrepancy between reported behaviour and actual behaviour
- Temporal disparity when comparing to the american sample
- Results provide a normative view of ethical behaviour (what does everyone else do/think)
9
Q
What differences did Henry (2005) find compared to Pope (1987) and Sullivan (2002)?
A
- Henry surveyed fourth year psychology students not registered psychologists
- Students were far more likely to rate breaking confidentiality as ethical than practicing psychologists (when client or other is at risk)
- Students more likely to rate behaviours as unquestionable unethical (kissing a client, telling a client you are attracted to them, providing services outside your expertise)
10
Q
What did Pope (1987) find were the most matched and unmatched behaviours?
A
- Mismatched - Common but unethical
- Providing services outside competence
- Unintentionally disclosing data
- Treating homosexuality as pathological
- Providing therapy to an employee
- Matched - Rare and unethical
- Sexual activity with client
- Erotic activity with client
- Disrobing in front of client
- Discussing a client by name in front of friends
11
Q
According to Dr White, what are the six components of moral intensity used to characterise ethical issues?
A
-
Moral Intensity
- Magnitude of consequences; sum of harm, benefits
- Social consensus; level of agreement eg tax avoidance vs tax minimisation
- Probability of effect; probability event will act occur x cause anticipated effect
- Temporary immediacy; time between action and its consequences occuring
- Proximity;‘nearness’ of person affected (stranger vs family)
- Concentration of effect; inverse of # people affected by magnitude of act. Affects fewer people more significantly
-
Responsibility: How much responsibility will people assume
- Proximity
- Temporal immediacy
- Probability
12
Q
What different types of ethical dilemmas may be experienced by psychologists?
A
-
Ethical Dilemmas; Clash of two or more ethical principles
- Do no harm vs euthanasia
- Non-disclosure vs warning
-
Mixed Dilemmas; Clash of ethics with non-ethics
- eg act against ethics in order to keep job
-
Difficult to judge;
- Contingency fees for forensic work
- Providing advice on tv
13
Q
According to Valasquez et al what are the 5 main philosophical approaches to ethical dilemmas?
A
-
Utilitarianism; Take the action that results in the greatest good and least harm.
- Key theorists Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill
- Q: what action does the most good/least harm?
-
Rights Approach; People are not objects to be manipulated and have fundamental moral rights
- Key theorists Kant
- Right to truth, Right of privacy, Right to safety etc
- Q: What action best respects the rights of the affected parties?
-
Fairness or Justice Approach; Show no favouritism or discimination
- Key theorist; Aristotle/ancient greeks
- Q: What actions treats everyone equally?
-
Common Good Approach; What is good for the community is good for the individual. Focus on benefits to all.
- Theorists; Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, Rowles
- Q: What action advances the common good?
-
Virtue Approach; Virtues are like habits, virtuous people are more likely to act ethically.
- Q: What action develops moral virtues?
14
Q
What is May’s Five Question ethical decision making model?
A
- May (1980) suggested five questions to ask yourself when deliberating over an ethical dilemma.
- What is going on in the case?
- By what criteria should decisions be made?
- Who should decide?
- For whose benefit does the professional act?
- How should the professional decide and act?
15
Q
What is Rest’s Four Component Model of Morality?
A
- Based on stages of development, 6 stages, in 3 ages
-
Preconventional: Up to the Age of 9
- Punishment/obedience; right and wrong determined by punishment
- Instrumental/relativist; right and wrong determined by what is rewarded (selfishness)
-
Conventional: Most adolescents and adults
- Interpersonal concordance; Conformity, being good is what pleases others
- Law and order; Being good is doing your duty to society (most people stop here)
-
Postconventional: 10 to 15% of the over 20s
- Social Contact; Good is determined by personal value system, although can be overidden by laws
- Universal ethical principle; live in accordance with moral principles which override laws
