COUC601 G2 DB Forum 2 (Module 3)
Topic: Ethical Issues When Counseling Different Ethnic Populations
Before beginning your thread, read, analyze, and critique the code of ethics found in the Reading &
Study folder. Then, follow these instructions:
Listed below is a situation that may or may not violate codes of ethics when working with families. Study
the scenario carefully and then go to the codes of ethics for AAMFT, IAMFC, AACC, and ACA to find the
ethical answers to the dilemmas presented. Be sure to record the code location on each ethical code
where the violation or permission is given for the counselor to do what had been done (ex: AAMFT 2.2
or ACA B.7.2).
You have been counseling a family of Korean origin for the past 5 weeks. Specific family members have
been suffering from generalized anxiety disorder, which is connected to family discord and what you see
as blurred boundary issues. In your fifth counseling session, the teenage daughter tells you that her
parents do not understand American culture and how it affects family rules. Having worked with over a
hundred clients struggling with anxiety, you feel she needs to set clear boundaries with her parents. You
instruct her to exercise more independence from her family and seek to become self-actualized.
As a competent Christian counselor, you also give her Mark 10:6–9 and Luke 14:26–27 and ask her to
study them this week to see how individuals must distance themselves and become self-differentiated.
In your reply, look for other confirmations in the codes that the therapist either did well or violated
competent practice.
Your thread must be at least 500 words. In addition to the thread, you will prepare a reply of at least 400
words to 1 classmate’s thread.
Your thread is due by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Thursday of Module/Week 3, and your reply is due by 11:59
p.m. (ET) on Sunday of the same module/week.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Working with the family described in the given scenario, several ethical violations come to light.
One issue is that the clinician is not respecting the culture that the family originates from. Korean culture
often values interdependence and operates from a collectivistic framework. Chung and Gale (2006) note
in Eastern countries dominated by Confucian-based collectivistic value systems such as Korea, culture
primarily emphasizes family ties, connectedness, and conformity, and does not encourage children to
achieve psychological independence from their parents. Kwon (2001) notes that drawing upon the social-
psychological concept of interdependence (Asian construal of self), that there is a need for a different
understanding of “boundaries,” since some Asian people have a strikingly different construal of the self,
of others, and of the interdependence of the two.
COUC601 G2 DB Forum 2 (Module 3)
While the clinician’s cultural background is not noted, it seems that he or she is operating from a
differing lens, denoting a more individualistic viewpoint often seen in Western culture. Being a culturally
competent counselor and operating in an ethical manner would necessitate that the clinician respects the
family’s worldview. The American Association of Christian Counselors (AACC, 2014, ES1-500) denotes
this as one of the eight foundational principles, specifically addressing and requiring the demonstration of
cultural regard in counseling. Section 1-530-a (AACC, 2014) says that clinicians do not impose their
values on clients.
Further, the American Counseling Association (ACA, 2014) notes in A.4.9 that clinicians avoid
harm. Section A.4.b (ACA, 2014) is congruent with the AACC in noting that clinicians avoid imposing
their personal values. Another ethical issue is the boundaries of competency that the clinician
demonstrates and the need to have this expanded. The ACA (2014) addresses this in C.2.a noting
opportunities for increased competency through work with diverse populations, C.2.d notes the need to
monitor this, and C.2.d notes utilizing consultation. The American Association for Marriage and Family
Therapy (AAMFT, 2020) states in Standard 3.1 that marriage and family therapists pursue knowledge of
new developments and maintain their competency in marriage and family therapy thorough education,
training, and supervised experience. The keyword in this code of ethics is that a family therapist will
maintain education. If the clinician reports that they did not know that it was the part of Korean culture,
they would be breaking this code of ethics due to a lack of education when they worked with a client who
was Korean.
Lastly, another issue could be offering scripture to the client as a source that directs her actions.
This client may or may not be a Christian. The AACC (2014) notes in section 1-530 that in working with
persons of different faiths, religions, and values that counselors work to understand the client's belief
system, always maintain respect for the client and strive to understand when faith and values issues are
important to the client and foster values-informed client decision-making in counseling. Counselors are to
share their own faith orientation only as a function of legitimate self-disclosure and when appropriate to
COUC601 G2 DB Forum 2 (Module 3)
client need, always maintaining a posture of humility. This scenario does not explicitly note if the client
subscribes or asks for this facet of counseling to be included. This could be an ethical violation.
Word Count: 522
Reference
American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. (2020, May 26). AAMFT code of ethics.
https://www.aamft.org/Legal_Ethics/Code_of_Ethics.aspx
American Association of Christian Counselors (AACC). (2004). AACC code of ethics: The Y2004 final
code. https://www.aacc.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/AACC-Code-of-Ethics-Master-
Document.pdf
Chung, H., & Gale, J. (2006). Comparing self-differentiation and psychological well-being between
Korean and European American students. Contemporary Family Therapy, 28, 367–381.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10591-006-9013-z
Kwon, S. (2001). Codependence and interdependence: Cross-cultural reappraisal of boundaries and
relationality. Pastoral Psychology, 50, 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010495016418
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Hi Carri, your post is well articulated and laid out nicely. In the given scenario, I also
noted two of the ethical concerns that you did. You noted a third that I did not articulate through
the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy’s Code of Ethics (2020). Client
autonomy is seen to be influenced and swayed through the clinician certainly. Expressing respect
for clients’ autonomy means acknowledging that clients who have decision-making capacity
have the right to make decisions regarding their welfare, even when their decisions contradict
their clinicians’ recommendations (Sedig, 2016).
The verbiage in the AAMFT’s Standard 1.8 (2020) helps better understand the clinician’s
role of a helper who “respect the rights of clients to make decisions and help them to understand
COUC601 G2 DB Forum 2 (Module 3)
the consequences of these decisions.” The role of helper is clearly defined and seen as an
assistance to the client, not as an instructor as you noted. When the clinician acts as the lead
decision-maker, the client could then or later on into the relationship feel that they have no voice
or choice in the decision-making process. This could potentially lead to dependence. This could
also lead to the client not fully being on board with the decisions made and affect treatment
outcomes. A considerable association of lack of respect for autonomy within autonomous
decision-making could have some negative implications. Entwistle, Carter, Cribb, and
McCaffery (2010) note that the client may blame themselves if treatment outcomes are poor
concerning patient care.
The age of the client is a factor that is the most concerning because she could be easily
moved to go along with the clinician’s suggestions. Powell (1984) notes that when working with
adolescent clients that ethical dilemmas often arise, especially when dealing with client
autonomy warranting attention to both legal and psychological cause. Deciphering the delicate
balance between being completely autonomous and still being at an age that parental influence is
warranted is something that can be more complex.
Regard for cultural considerations are seen to be lacking for sure within the therapeutic
interaction. Section ES1-500 within the American Association of Christian Counselors (AACC,
2014) code of ethics denote this as one of the eight foundational principles, specifically
addressing and requiring the demonstration of cultural regard in counseling. You make a great
contextual point concerning the scriptural verse used in the scenario. The age is something to
consider as the client is not in the developmental period (early adulthood) often in her life that
marriage is considered. Thus, the instruction suggested by the clinician to leave and cleave is
COUC601 G2 DB Forum 2 (Module 3)
unwarranted and premature. It is also unasked for. Thanks for sharing and enjoyed reading your
considerations.
Word Count: 441
Reference
American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. (2020, May 26). AAMFT code of
ethics. https://www.aamft.org/Legal_Ethics/Code_of_Ethics.aspx
Entwistle, V. A., Carter, S. M., Cribb, A., & McCaffery, K. (2010). Supporting patient autonomy:
the importance of clinician-patient relationships. Journal of General Internal
Medicine, 25(7), 741–745. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-010-1292-2
Powell, C. J. (1984). Ethical Principles and Issues of Competence in Counseling
Adolescents. The Counseling Psychologist, 12(3), 57–
68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000084123006
Sedig, L. (2016). What is the role of autonomy when in patient – and family- centered care when
patients and family members don’t agree? American Medical Association’s Journal of
Ethics, 18(1), 12-17. doi: 10.1001/journalofethics.2017.18.1.ecas2-1601.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
