PHIQUESTIONS attachement is below

Running Head: COUNSELING AND SEXUAL ORIENTATION 1

COUNSELLING AND SEXUAL ORIENTATION 2

Counseling and Sexual Orientation

Executive Summary

In clinical practice, there is always a case to solve every day which involves making decisions which are fair or unfair. There is always a criterion to use when making such decisions and that involves ethical or moral theories and practices.

Consequentialist Theory

Consequentialists argue that the moral value of anything lies in its impact. The most influential type of consequentialist theory is the utilitarianism theory which was founded and promoted by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill in 18th and 19th century respectively. They argued that utility is the principle that judges moral thinking through maximization of happiness and minimization of suffering (Bentham 2012). Some welfare-utilitarian argue enhancing or lowering human welfare while preference utilitarian’s aim at establishing and satisfying human preferences in their actions. I have to use this theory in accepting the client since that is the morally right thing to do.

Deontological Theory

This theory criticizes the consequentialist one as it focuses on the ways of meeting one’s goals meaning it may overlook the moral importance. The theory uses rules rather than consequences in justifying an action (Ethical Theories 1983). Kant in his theory argued that rules had to comply with categorical imperative which holds that: Moral rules should be applied to all rational and moral society members but not to some. All individuals should be treated never simply as means but rather as ends themselves. Members of a moral society should have a hand in making laws and live by them. This theory is depicted in the idea of duties psychologists owe to patients on their duty of care and duty of not harming them.

Casuistry

This case-based reasoning focuses on practical decision-making in specific cases based on precedent but not on rules. It first identifies the specific feature of a case, makes a comparison to other similar cases and experience and tries to identify similarities and differences between them. It is useful when discussing the best patient interests (Lodge 2014). Considering other few preceding cases of homosexuality, one must handle the case recognizing gay marriage was recently legalized.

Principles

a. Respect for autonomy: This involves respect for decision-making abilities of individuals through enabling them to make informed decisions and allowing them to live their life so long as it does not affect the welfare of others (Anshen, 1969)

b. Beneficence: This involves balancing the benefits of treatment against the risks and costs of the same.

c. Non-maleficence: This involves the professional not harming the patient or avoiding causing harm.

d. Justice: When dealing with others, it is important to assume equal treatment to ensure each person get their due portion. My decision would be to take in the client, however much my Christian values may be compromised.

Introduction

In matters that involve what is wrong and what is right just as in the case of a strong Christian psychologist dealing with a gay client, one may quickly take one side. It is possible to argue by the morals of the psychologist’s religion. However, one must first consider view the situation from an ethical standpoint.

In the case of the gay patient, I will have to decide on doing the right thing as a counselor by taking in the patient although it was difficult to make the decision basing on my religious beliefs. It’s a moral dilemma, in that what I do is likely to violate an obligation, responsibility of being just and respectful to the patient and that of me not harming my values. The AJ (analysis and justification) method for ethics gives a fair way of approaching such a dilemma.

Importance of AJ method (why not rely on instinct)

The method of analysis and justice aims to go beyond gut instincts on moral questions. By giving and weighing reasons for one’s opinion. Sometimes we already have a strong feeling about what is supposed to be done, but then it is never enough in making decisions in some cases.

Why need the AJ method

Instincts do not convince anyone about your opinions. Having a view on what is wrong or right and saying it is not helpful or persuasive to any person. The method provides more hope than relying on initial instincts of a case and is likely to help a client, and the counselor understands each other if well applied.

This method helps one to understand their basis of views rather than leaving them as a complete mystery. If you have to make decisions based on instincts, then you got no idea of your moral views grounds.

There can be a mistake in the use of gut instincts if they are based on bias or prejudice learned from teachers and society. Failure to see the other side of the issue or not seeing the strength of reasons can also be a source of mistake, and this is where the AJ method chips in.

Procedure for moral reasoning

1. Creative problem solving (CPS)

When handling a strong ethical dilemma like the one at hand, it is necessary to come up with an action plan that can’t be reasonably objected to, on the based on moral grounds. This solves the dilemma by avoiding it thus ensuring that you do not choose between ethically troubling alternatives. In this case, starting with reflection on ethics and come up with a plan which details the disturbing options. In this case, a creative solution would be providing good health care to the patient meaning to accept him as a client and listening to his side of promoting gayish which would mean the promotion of his welfare (Thiroux and Krasemann 2016). While mentally preparing oneself for what may be discussed despite the fact it may be uncomfortable.

2. Listing the pros and cons

Here, I will have the advantages and disadvantages of each choice detailed down. In order to monitor the various ethical considerations, it is necessary to have a list of the main options and the reason for and against each option. There is a need to go into detail of each of the principles for guidance on the moral values that should be carefully looked dealing with the case. I will have to go back and look at the options I have on my own before meeting with the client for our next session to include any left possibilities.

3. Analysis

The step involves evaluation of strengths of various reasons in order to be thoroughly and seriously considering if each of the reasons is strong in an independent manner or comparison with other reason in the pros and cons list. If the evaluation is to be successful, then there is a need to keep in mind what assumptions could be essential to consider a reason important. (Psychology and Morals 2015). A reason considered strong if it is quite likely to protect or enhance critical values.

4. Justification

This is the last step of the AJ method and is where one determines which method is preferable among all the options. At this step, the psychologist introduces the issue and gives the client that option which analysis has seen most preferable. Support is the next step which involves reasons why you have selected the preferable option while defense details reasons that argue against the views that are not morally preferable and finally summary gives short key details on reasoning reviewing the most better option.

Summary

This method perfectly fits the case of the homosexual patient since the counselor is in a big dilemma regarding if they will work with the client. The steps of the method are applicable in this case, and can be applied in order to come up with a solution together with the client that will maximize his happiness. The needs of the client are to come first before the morals of the therapist. No matter how much it goes against the psychologist’s beliefs the psychologist is required to give the client the best treatment possible.

References

Anshen, Ruth N. Moral Principles of Action: Man's Ethical Imperative. Harper, 1969.

Bentham, Jeremy. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. publisher not identified, 2012.

Ethical Theories: Session 1. The Network, 1983.

Lodge, R. C. Plato's Theory of Ethics: The Moral Criterion and the Highest Good. Taylor and Francis, 2014.

Psychology and Morals: An Analysis of Character. Routledge, 2016.

Thiroux, Jacques P, and Keith W. Krasemann. Ethics: Theory and Practice. Prentice Hall, 2012.