Signature Assignment – Applying an Ethical Decision-Making Module: Case Studies

FO611 Ethics and Professional Issues

Page 1 of 6

Signature Assignment Details

Signature Assignment Information A signature assignment is an assignment, task, activity, project, or exam used to collect evidence of student learning for a specific program learning outcome(s). The PLO rubric is used to assess the signature assignment and the cumulative results are used as part of a program’s reporting on student learning in the annual report or self-study. Other coursework can build toward the signature assignment, meaning that the signature assignment integrates cumulative knowledge of what the student learned in a particular course or set of courses for a particular program learning outcome(s). Like other assignments, a signature assignment is graded numerically to be factored into the final course grade.

FO611 Ethics and Professional Issues For the signature assignment for this course, students will apply an ethical decision-making model to each of the three cases below. The paper should be an integrative, critical review of each case while integrating the most current version of the American Counseling Association (ACA) Code of Ethics as a primary resource. Students may integrate additional materials such as additional ethical codes or laws pertaining to the cases, however the ACA Code should be the primary reference in the paper. The additional codes should be discussed with the instructor prior to adding them to the paper. Below is the ethical decision-making model that students must use for each case. Students are to produce one paper that separates each of the three vignettes and uses the ten (10) steps of the Welfel (2016) decision making model to resolve the dilemma. In each step, students should write in a clear, logical manner while including references as needed in order to thoroughly address each step. Students should not merely state that a step was complete without discussing all relevant aspects of that step. Each case will be approximately 4-6 pages long not including title page or references. This means that your paper will end up being approximately 14- 20 pages including title page and references in APA style format. Please read the chapter associated with the Welfel model for ethical decision making as this will assist how you address each step. Ethical Decision-Making Model Welfel, E.R. (2016). A Model for Ethical Practice: Using Resources to Enhance Individual Judgment and Ethical Resolve.

Step 1: Develop ethical sensitivity, integrating personal and professional values. Step 2: Clarify facts, stakeholders, and the sociocultural context of the case. Step 3: Define the central issues and the available options. Step 4: Refer to professional standards, guidelines, and relevant law/regulations. Step 5: Search out ethics scholarship. Step 6: Apply ethical principles to the situation. Step 7: Consult with supervisor and respected colleagues. Step 8: Deliberate and decide. Step 9: Inform supervisor, implement and document decision-making process and actions. Step 10: Reflect on the experience.

Suggested Format of Paper (APA Style)

I. Title Page II. Case #1: Ethical Decision-Making Model Analysis

a. Review steps 1-10, while incorporating relevant diversity variables and ethical and professional codes/standards and necessary details from the Welfel model.

III. Case #2: Ethical Decision-Making Model Analysis a. Review steps 1-10, while incorporating relevant diversity variables and ethical and professional codes/standards

and necessary details from the Welfel model. IV. Case #3: Ethical Decision-Making Model Analysis

a. Review steps 1-10, while incorporating relevant diversity variables and ethical and professional codes/standards and necessary details from the Welfel model.

V. Reference Page

FO611 Ethics and Professional Issues

Page 2 of 6

CASES In each of the following dilemmas, use the Welfel (2016) ethical decision-making model to address the situation to come up with a plan. Make sure that you review the following references while writing up the paper. Mandatory references

• American Counseling Association (2014). ACA Code of Ethics. Alexandria, VA: Author. https://www.counseling.org/resources/aca-code-of-ethics.pdf

• Welfel, E.R. (2016). A Model for Ethical Practice: Using Resources to Enhance Individual Judgment and Ethical Resolve. Please discuss supplemental references (additional codes, laws, book chapters, etc.) with your instructor prior to including in your paper.

Case #1: You are an intern at an outpatient center where juveniles have been mandated by court to receive your services, which include psycho-education on anger and stress management to clients from diverse backgrounds and socioeconomic status. You have employed all of the strategies that you were taught in graduate school, researched the topics, and tried to consult with your supervisor regularly. However, your supervisor always tells you that you are doing fine and supervision is not needed because you are doing such a good job. Your supervisor does not even listen to you when you have questions and does not appear to be monitoring the client’s progress. You are not licensed as a counselor, but want to be licensed in your state, so you need the appropriate forms signed by your supervisor, which indicate that you completed your hours and required supervision. You have questions about what you are doing, especially since your clients have world views different than yourself.

Case #2: Your adult client has been arrested on several occasions, which resulted in your client having a long criminal record, being on probation, and being incarcerated on a number of occasions. The client was arrested and convicted for selling controlled substances. You were asked to visit the client to complete a current mental status and provide recommendations to the court. The client’s mental status exam did not yield any clinically significant issues. The client reported having positive thoughts about going home. The client has stated that they have learned a life lesson and will “never do anything against the law again.” The client denied having any distressing dreams, hallucinations, no manic or depressive episodes, and no problems with sleeping. The client reported no concerns about appetite and had no changes in the last few weeks. The client agreed that the medications were working well for diagnosed Bipolar I Disorder. Upon questioning about the client’s children, the client said the children have visited about four times since this last incarceration, and the client was happy about those visits. During your evaluation, you notice that you have started to have romantic feelings toward the client because the client seems like a nice person. You have decided that the client was in the wrong place at the wrong time and had to do what was needed to in order to survive. You have never felt this strongly about a client in the past.

Case #3: You are working with a client who is from a different religion than you and has strong beliefs about religion. You know very little about the religion or the religious practices so you have some reservations working with the client due to your lack of knowledge and how your lack of knowledge could negatively affect your therapeutic relationship. The client does not always answer your questions, is somewhat evasive, and insists on taking breaks to pray or meditate during the evaluation process. You know you are not supposed to cause harm to clients but are feeling hesitant to continue the evaluation process due to your lack of knowledge and familiarity with the client’s diverse background. You also think that the client may not open up to you due to your differences. You want to refer the client to someone else but are not sure if that is appropriate. You are receiving supervision in the process and your supervisor thinks that you are able to handle this case competently.

The grading rubrics for each case are below, totaling 300 points (100 points for each case).

FO611 Ethics and Professional Issues

Page 3 of 6

CASE 1 RUBRIC

Points Student’s

Score Does Not Meet Criteria Somewhat Lacking Meets Criteria

Case #1: (100 points)

Review of Ethical Decision Making Model and Ethical Codes (____ of 80 points total)

Welfel (2016) Model There are ethical decision- making model steps missing, or review of all steps was poorly integrated and/or there are 4+ missing elements. No ethical and professional codes are discussed, or they are irrelevant. Information is unclear throughout. Complete absence of analytic and critical thinking skills. There is a poor discussion of the subject matter, and absence of analytic and critical thinking skills. (0-64)

Welfel (2016) Model All ethical decision-making model steps are reviewed, however, not thoroughly and missing 1-3 crucial elements. Only one ethical and professional code, standard, guideline, and/or law is discussed, or peripheral codes or guidelines are mentioned. Information is not thorough, may be unclear/vague during some sections and difficult to understand or follow. There is some difficulty with analytic and critical thinking and writing skills. Information presented has some inaccuracies and/or irrelevancies. (64.5-72)

Welfel (2016) Model All ethical decision-making model steps are reviewed thoroughly. At least two ethical and professional codes, standards, guidelines, and/or laws related to the topic are discussed. Information is presented clearly, completely, and across all sections of the paper. The subject matter is clearly discussed. Information presented is accurate and relevant to the field of forensic psychology and/or counseling in general and case facts in particular. Analytic and critical thinking skills are demonstrated throughout. (72.5-80)

Diversity Variables

(____ of 10 points total)

Diversity Variables No diversity variables are discussed, or they are irrelevant. (0-7.5)

Diversity Variables Only one diversity variable is discussed, or peripheral diversity variables are mentioned. (8-8.5)

Diversity Variables At least two diversity variables related to the topic are discussed. (9-10)

Grammar/ Organization (____ of 10

points)

There are at least 6 violations of APA rules and at least 3 or more missing or incorrect citations and references. Organization is unclear in at least 3 sections. There are no headers. Multiple spelling (5+) or grammatical errors are made. (0-7.5)

There are less than 5 APA rule violations and/or 3-5 missing or incorrect citations and references. Organization is unclear in 1-2 sections (unfocused paragraphs, poor topic sentences, poor transitions). Several (1-4) spelling or grammatical errors are made. (8-8.5)

All APA rules are followed for citations, quotes, references, etc. Paragraphs, topic sentences, and transitions aid in understanding main points. Information is presented logically. No spelling or grammatical errors are made. (9-10)

Case #1: POINTS

POSSIBLE (100)

(_______ of 100 points)

Case 2 Rubric on next page.

FO611 Ethics and Professional Issues

Page 4 of 6

CASE 2 RUBRIC

Points Student’s

Score Does Not Meet Criteria Somewhat Lacking Meets Criteria

Case #2: (100 points)

Review of Ethical Decision Making Model and Ethical Codes (____ of 80 points total)

Welfel (2016) Model There are ethical decision- making model steps missing, or review of all steps was poorly integrated and/or there are 4+ missing elements. No ethical and professional codes are discussed, or they are irrelevant. Information is unclear throughout. Complete absence of analytic and critical thinking skills. There is a poor discussion of the subject matter, and absence of analytic and critical thinking skills. (0-64)

Welfel (2016) Model All ethical decision-making model steps are reviewed, however, not thoroughly and missing 1-3 crucial elements. Only one ethical and professional code, standard, guideline, and/or law is discussed, or peripheral codes or guidelines are mentioned. Information is not thorough, may be unclear/vague during some sections and difficult to understand or follow. There is some difficulty with analytic and critical thinking and writing skills. Information presented has some inaccuracies and/or irrelevancies. (64.5-72)

Welfel (2016) Model All ethical decision-making model steps are reviewed thoroughly. At least two ethical and professional codes, standards, guidelines, and/or laws related to the topic are discussed. Information is presented clearly, completely, and across all sections of the paper. The subject matter is clearly discussed. Information presented is accurate and relevant to the field of forensic psychology and/or counseling in general and case facts in particular. Analytic and critical thinking skills are demonstrated throughout. (72.5-80)

Diversity Variables (____ of 10 points total)

Diversity Variables No diversity variables are discussed, or they are irrelevant. (0-7.5)

Diversity Variables Only one diversity variable is discussed, or peripheral diversity variables are mentioned. (8-8.5)

Diversity Variables At least two diversity variables related to the topic are discussed. (9-10)

Grammar/ Organization (____ of 10 points)

There are at least 6 violations of APA rules and at least 3 or more missing or incorrect citations and references. Organization is unclear in at least 3 sections. There are no headers. Multiple spelling (5+) or grammatical errors are made. (0-7.5)

There are less than 5 APA rule violations and/or 3-5 missing or incorrect citations and references. Organization is unclear in 1-2 sections (unfocused paragraphs, poor topic sentences, poor transitions). Several (1-4) spelling or grammatical errors are made. (8-8.5)

All APA rules are followed for citations, quotes, references, etc. Paragraphs, topic sentences, and transitions aid in understanding main points. Information is presented logically. No spelling or grammatical errors are made. (9-10)

Case #2: POINTS

POSSIBLE (100)

(_______ of 100 points)

Case 3 rubric on next page.

FO611 Ethics and Professional Issues

Page 5 of 6

CASE 3 RUBRIC

Points Student’s Score

Does Not Meet Criteria Somewhat Lacking Meets Criteria

Case #3: (100 points)

Review of Ethical Decision Making Model and Ethical Codes (____ of 80 points total)

Welfel (2016) Model There are ethical decision- making model steps missing, or review of all steps was poorly integrated and/or there are 4+ missing elements. No ethical and professional codes are discussed, or they are irrelevant. Information is unclear throughout. Complete absence of analytic and critical thinking skills. There is a poor discussion of the subject matter, and absence of analytic and critical thinking skills. (0-64)

Welfel (2016) Model All ethical decision-making model steps are reviewed, however, not thoroughly and missing 1-3 crucial elements. Only one ethical and professional code, standard, guideline, and/or law is discussed, or peripheral codes or guidelines are mentioned. Information is not thorough, may be unclear/vague during some sections and difficult to understand or follow. There is some difficulty with analytic and critical thinking and writing skills. Information presented has some inaccuracies and/or irrelevancies. (64.5-72)

Welfel (2016) Model All ethical decision-making model steps are reviewed thoroughly. At least two ethical and professional codes, standards, guidelines, and/or laws related to the topic are discussed. Information is presented clearly, completely, and across all sections of the paper. The subject matter is clearly discussed. Information presented is accurate and relevant to the field of forensic psychology and/or counseling in general and case facts in particular. Analytic and critical thinking skills are demonstrated throughout. (72.5-80)

Diversity Variables (____ of 10 points total)

Diversity Variables No diversity variables are discussed, or they are irrelevant. (0-7.5)

Diversity Variables Only one diversity variable is discussed, or peripheral diversity variables are mentioned. (8-8.5)

Diversity Variables At least two diversity variables related to the topic are discussed. (9-10)

Grammar/ Organization (____ of 10 points)

There are at least 6 violations of APA rules and at least 3 or more missing or incorrect citations and references. Organization is unclear in at least 3 sections. There are no headers. Multiple spelling (5+) or grammatical errors are made. (0-7.5)

There are less than 5 APA rule violations and/or 3-5 missing or incorrect citations and references. Organization is unclear in 1-2 sections (unfocused paragraphs, poor topic sentences, poor transitions). Several (1-4) spelling or grammatical errors are made. (8-8.5)

All APA rules are followed for citations, quotes, references, etc. Paragraphs, topic sentences, and transitions aid in understanding main points. Information is presented logically. No spelling or grammatical errors are made. (9-10)

Case #3: POINTS

POSSIBLE (100)

(_______ of 100 points)

Total for all 3 Cases

TOTAL POINTS POSSIBLE (300)

(_______ of 300 points)

Program Learning Outcomes Rubric on next page

FO611 Ethics and Professional Issues

Page 6 of 6

Program Learning Outcome Rubric The Program Learning Outcome (PLO) Rubric will be utilized to assess the student’s level of performance for the PLO associated with

this course: Ethics. In addition to receiving a numerical grade for this assignment, students will also receive a rating along a scale of 1

(Novice Level Performance) to 4 (Graduate Level Performance) for the PLO.

Program Learning Outcome (PLO)

Performance Level 1 (Novice)

Performance Level 2 (Internship)

Performance Level 3 (Entry-level)

Performance Level 4 (Graduate)

Ethics: Students will be able to organize professional activities by ethical and professional codes, standards, and guidelines; statutes, rules, and regulations; and relevant case law.

Student’s integration of ethical and professional codes is minimal to none. There is not a commitment to identify relevant codes. Student leaves 2+ pertinent codes out of the analysis and/or discusses codes in a vague or tangential manner. Student does not display ethical values and/or does not recognize own moral attitudes. Student does not demonstrate knowledge on identifying and applying an ethical decision-making model effectively and needs significant direction from supervisor/ instructor (tutoring on 3+ occasions). Student manifests little to no understanding of the relationship between laws, standards, and professional activities. Student needs moderate to significant direction to appreciate and resolve ethical conflict between codes and laws.

Student integrates ethical and professional codes, standards, and regulations into professional practice, however code sections are not relevant or pertinent to the issues. Student omits at least 1 pertinent code section. Student does not fully recognize own moral attitudes. Student demonstrates knowledge on identifying and applying an ethical decision-making model, however not effectively and needs moderate direction from supervisor/ instructor (tutoring on 2+ occasions). Student manifests adequate understanding of the relationship between laws, standards, and professional activities. Student needs minimal to moderate direction to appreciate and resolve ethical conflict between codes and laws.

Student is committed to integrating ethical and professional codes, standards, and regulations into professional practice. Student may leave one peripheral code section out but displays ethical values and recognizes own moral attitudes. Student demonstrates knowledge on identifying and effectively applying an ethical decision-making model. Student manifests good understanding of the relationship between laws, standards, and professional activities. Student is able to appreciate and resolve ethical conflict between codes and laws satisfactorily.

Student is committed to integrating ethical and professional codes, standards, and regulations into professional practice. Student recognizes own moral attitudes, such as accepting opposing viewpoints as valid despite disagreement. Student spontaneously identifies, internalizes, and effectively applies an ethical decision- making model. Student manifests in- depth understanding of the relationship between laws, standards, and professional activities. Student is able to appreciate and resolve ethical conflict between codes and laws at the advanced level.