Ethics and Professional Issues

Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership,

Vision, and Action

Ethics and Professional Issues Related to the Practice of Social Justice in Counseling

Psychology

Contributors: Rebecca L. Toporek & Robert A. Williams

Edited by: Rebecca L. Toporek, Lawrence H. Gerstein, Nadya A. Fouad, Gargi Roysircar &

Tania Israel

Book Title: Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and

Action

Chapter Title: "Ethics and Professional Issues Related to the Practice of Social Justice in

Counseling Psychology"

Pub. Date: 2006

Access Date: June 17, 2017

Publishing Company: SAGE Publications, Inc.

City: Thousand Oaks

Print ISBN: 9781412910071

Online ISBN: 9781412976220

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412976220.n2

Print pages: 17-34

©2006 SAGE Publications, Inc.. All Rights Reserved.

This PDF has been generated from SAGE Knowledge. Please note that the pagination of

the online version will vary from the pagination of the print book.

Ethics and Professional Issues Related to the Practice of Social Justice in Counseling Psychology

Psychologists respect and protect civil and human rights and the central importance of freedom of inquiry and expression in research, teaching, and publication. They strive to help the public in developing informed judgments and choices concerning human behavior. In doing so, they perform many roles, such as researcher, educator, diagnostician, therapist, supervisor, consultant, administrator, social interventionist, and expert witness. (American Psychological Association [APA], 2002)

This statement, taken from the Preamble of the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (APA, 2002), hereafter referred to as the “APA Code,” identifies a range of professional roles and responsibilities of psychologists. Many of the roles noted in this statement are reasonable avenues that, when practiced from a place of ethics and accountability, can contribute significantly to the elimination of injustice, inequity, and bias.

There have been calls for a clearer and more consistent social justice presence in counseling psychology (Carter, 2003; Fouad et al., 2004; Ratts, D'Andrea, & Arredondo, 2004). This Handbook is designed to provide readers with the opportunity to see the wide range of roles, social issues, and projects through which counseling psychologists are contributing to social justice. The first chapter (Fouad, Gerstein, & Toporek) provides historical and conceptual underpinnings for the topics and approaches contained throughout the book. As discussed in that chapter, social justice has fluctuated in its acceptance within the profession of counseling psychology. Given this fluctuation, attention to ethics and ethical issues particular to situations involving counseling psychologists and social justice has been scarce. A more explicit discussion of ethics is necessary for a thoughtful and intentional base for social justice in practice, training, and research.

The intent of this chapter is to examine existing ethics documents for their potential to provide guidance and support for social justice work. Our primary focus will be on the APA Code (2002). However, we will also draw upon language and content presented in the ethics codes of other disciplines and specialties that historically have maintained social justice as a central tenet. In the second part of the chapter, we highlight ethical issues that may arise when working toward social justice and provide a case example demonstrating how a psychologist might attend to these issues. Finally, we provide recommendations regarding future development of ethical guidelines for social justice.

Working Definitions of Social Justice

With the renewed emphasis on social justice in counseling psychology, there is a need for a shared understanding of definitions and constructs. Two particular resources anchor our discussion. First, the Social Justice and Ethics Social Action Group that convened at the National Counseling Psychology Conference (Houston, 2001) established the following working definition of “social justice”:

A concept that advocates engaging individuals as coparticipants in decisions which directly affect their lives; it involves taking some action, and educating individuals in order to open possibilities, and to act with value and respect for individuals and their group identities, considering power differentials in all areas of counseling practice and research. (Blustein, Elman, & Gerstein, 2001, p. 9)

SAGE SAGE Reference Copyright © 2006 by Sage Publications, Inc.

Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action

Page 2 of 16

Second, Toporek and Liu (2001) distinguished between the related concepts of advocacy, empowerment, social action, and social justice, and they helped to define the construct of social justice within the framework of the counseling profession. They described a model using client advocacy as a unifying construct with empowerment on one end of a continuum and social action on the other. Toporek and Liu provided the following definition for advocacy.

[Advocacy is] action a mental health professional, counselor, or psychologist takes in assisting clients and client groups to achieve therapy goals through participating in clients' environments. Advocacy may be seen as an array of roles that counseling professionals adopt in the interest of clients, including empowerment, advocacy, and social action. (p. 387)

Empowerment was described as action taken with a client to facilitate his or her ability to act in the face of oppression, whereas social action was described as action taken by the counselor, external to the client, to confront or act on behalf of client groups (Toporek & Liu, 2001). These definitions, and the definition of social justice provided by the Social Justice Ethics Work Group of the Houston conference, provide anchors for our examination of the relevance and utility of existing ethical codes.

Ethical Codes and Guidelines

Ethics codes, guidelines, and decision-making models serve as tools for ethical behavior. Within the APA Code (2002), the language that addresses social justice most clearly may be found in the Preamble and Principles. It is important to note that the Preamble and General Principles are “aspirational goals to guide psychologists toward the highest ideals of psychology. Although the Preamble and General Principles are not themselves enforceable rules, they should be considered by psychologists in arriving at an ethical course of action” (p. 1061). As aspirational guidelines, these have the potential to facilitate decision making regarding issues that arise in the course of social action.

In our review of the APA Code (2002), as well as the Canadian Code of Ethics for Psychologists (Canadian Psychological Association [CPA], 2000), the Association of Black Psychologists's Ethical Standards of Black Psychologists (Akbar & Nobles, 2002), the Feminist Therapy Ethical Code (Feminist Therapy Institute [FTI], 1999), and the National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics (National Association of Social Workers [NASW], 1999), three recurring constructs seemed relevant for ethical practice in social justice: respect, responsibility, and action. We will organize our examination of the ethical codes around these three themes, with particular attention to the APA Code. Within each section, we will also note criticisms that have been voiced and draw upon other ethical codes for guidance.

Respect

Respect for the integrity and strength of affected communities and clients is the core of any kind of work aimed at improving the conditions of oppressed groups. The APA Code (2002), Principle E, Respect for People's Rights and Dignity, asserts that it is imperative to respect cultural differences and take these into consideration when working with ethnic groups. Although this is laudable, clearer guidelines are needed regarding how this respect may be operationalized—for example, utilizing respect and awareness of a community's values and mores as determining forces in engaging in social justice interventions. A useful guideline for psychologists who are engaged in community work can be found in the CPA Code (2000),

SAGE SAGE Reference Copyright © 2006 by Sage Publications, Inc.

Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action

Page 3 of 16

which states that psychologists must “acquire an adequate knowledge of the culture, social structure, and customs of a community before beginning any major work there” (Respect for Society, Paragraph 1). This is strengthened by the assertion that psychologists must “convey respect for and abide by prevailing community mores, social customs, and cultural expectations in their scientific and professional activities” (Respect for Society, Paragraph 2). The inclusion of the need to “abide” by the community and cultural mores helps to secure the position of the community as a driving force in the intervention.

The Ethical Standards of Black Psychologists goes even further in its ethical standards, stressing that Black psychologists are expected to “give deference to the will and intent of Black people” (Akbar & Nobles, 2002, p. 8). This strengths-based perspective conveys the assumption that the intent of Black people and human beings is inherently toward growth rather than destruction. This is articulated with regard to research in the statement, “This research should be reflective of the psychological strengths of Black people and/or should be focused on the cultivation of strengths which will foster such improvement” (Akbar & Nobles, 2002, p. 7). This high level of respect is commensurate with the responsibility and political implications of one's role as psychologist of a given age, race, ethnicity, social class, gender, sexual orientation, and disability status.

Respect thus lays a foundation for social justice work by ensuring that the psychologist understands and abides by the community's strengths, goals, and determination.

Responsibility

In our reading of ethical codes, three issues seemed to reflect a construct we identified as “responsibility”: ensuring equal access to psychology, minimizing the effects of bias and discrimination, and serving oppressed communities. First, the APA Code (2002), Principle D, Justice, states, “Psychologists recognize that fairness and justice entitle all persons to access to and benefit from the contributions of psychology and to equal quality in the processes, procedures, and services being conducted by psychologists” (p. 1062). This statement may be interpreted as a suggestion that the expertise held by psychologists should be shared with all who can benefit. The difficulty, however, lies in the condition that systemic injustice may hinder equal access and quality of care. There is a need for clearer directives regarding the role that psychologists might have in eradicating the injustice that limits access to services.

The second ethical issue related to responsibility is that of bias. Principle D, Justice, of the APA Code (2002) states, “Psychologists exercise reasonable judgment and take precautions to ensure that their potential biases, the boundaries of their competence, and the limitations of their expertise do not lead to or condone unjust practices” (pp. 1062–1063). In addition, Principle G, Human Relations, clearly states that psychologists should not engage in discrimination and harassment. These statements take important steps in acknowledging the responsibility that counseling psychologists have to eliminate their own biases. However, it appears that the extent of the responsibility is directed toward the psychologist's own behavior. Notably, some authors (e.g., Brown, 1997) have charged that this approach is reactive and does not go far enough in asserting the need for psychologists to actively rectify discrimination and other forms of oppression. If counseling psychologists are committed to social justice, there is a need for clearer statements encouraging prevention of unjust practices as ethical behavior. One example of such language is seen in the NASW (1999) ethical code, which states that social workers “are sensitive to cultural and ethnic diversity and strive to end discrimination, oppression, poverty, and other forms of social injustice” (Paragraph 2).

SAGE SAGE Reference Copyright © 2006 by Sage Publications, Inc.

Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action

Page 4 of 16

The third area of responsibility may be described as an expectation that professionals actively serve members of oppressed groups and, in doing so, acknowledge the complexities of the group and oppressive circumstances. This ranges from direct statements, such as the responsibility of Black psychologists to return their expertise to the Black community (Akbar & Nobles, 2002), to statements asserting responsibility to serve marginalized or vulnerable groups. As an example of the latter type of statement, the CPA Code (2002) states,

Although psychologists have a responsibility to respect the dignity of all persons with whom they come in contact in their role as psychologists, the nature of their contract with society demands that their greatest responsibility be to those persons in the most vulnerable position. (Values Statement, Paragraph 3)

Similarly, Bowman (1991) asserted that not only should psychologists learn about the communities that they serve, but they should be a part of the development of “special safeguards” in research to ensure that “vulnerable race and class groups are not systematically selected because of their compromised position, their open vulnerability, and their manipulability” (p. 753). Such a stance conveys both respect and responsibility for both the individuals and the communities that are being served. Although the APA Code (2002), Principle E: Respect for People's Rights and Dignity, refers to “special safeguards,” it appears that this was written specifically to “protect the rights and welfare of persons or communities whose vulnerabilities impair autonomous decision making” (p. 1063), and it is uncertain whether this is meant to generalize to populations who are not “impaired.”

Responsibility has been described as having a duty to serve oppressed groups, eliminate oppression, and make efforts to be conscientious in how one engages and intervenes within a community. Respect and responsibility lead to the third area of ethical practice, social action.

Social Action

Ethics in social justice inherently invoke an explicit call to action. Ethical codes we reviewed for this chapter varied in the extent and nature of the action expected of the professional. Attention to social action appeared to be articulated in the APA Code (2002), primarily through Principle B: Fidelity and Responsibility, which states that “psychologists strive to contribute a portion of their professional time for little or no compensation or personal advantage” (p. 1062). This statement encouraging pro bono work may be important in serving communities with limited resources. However, there is no clear expectation that these are the communities that psychologists will serve or that part of the work will be toward eliminating injustice.

Payton (1994) expressed concern regarding the shift from a focus on human rights, present in earlier ethical codes, to “a need to protect psychologists” (p. 317). Similarly, other authors have charged that APA Codes are written with the intent to protect the consumer and the profession, and that this emphasis does little to facilitate active involvement in confronting injustice (e.g., Brown, 1997; Lerman & Porter, 1990; Payton, 1994).

It is possible that the roles outlined in the Preamble of the APA Code (2002) have been interpreted in such a way that limits counseling psychologists' view of the appropriateness and relevance of social action. A review of such language in ethics documents of other organizations illustrates how social action may be articulated more clearly in ethical guidelines. For example, the CPA Code (2002) provides a very brief but direct call to action, stating the expectation that psychologists “act to correct practices that are unjustly discriminatory” (Nondiscrimination, Paragraph 2). The NASW is more explicit in its principle of

SAGE SAGE Reference Copyright © 2006 by Sage Publications, Inc.

Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action

Page 5 of 16

“Social and Political Action,” which states,

Social workers should engage in social and political action that seeks to ensure that all people have equal access to the resources, employment, services, and opportunities they require to meet their basic human needs and to develop fully…. Social workers should act to expand choice and opportunity for all people, with special regard for vulnerable, disadvantaged, oppressed, and exploited people and groups. (Social and Political Action, Paragraphs 1–2)

Finally, a variety of assertions regarding the multiple ways in which a feminist therapist may take social action are listed in a section of the Feminist Therapy Code of Ethics (FTI, 1999) explicitly titled “Social Change.” Examples of these assertions include the following: “A feminist therapist seeks multiple avenues for impacting change, including public education and advocacy within professional organizations, lobbying for legislative action, and other appropriate activities” (Social Change, Paragraph 1) and “A feminist therapist actively questions practices in her community that appear harmful to clients or therapists. She assists clients in intervening on their own behalf” (FTI, 1999; Social Change, Paragraph 2). Similarly, counseling psychologists who endorse social justice as part of their practice must understand that social action is an inherent part of such practice. This action may be accomplished through a range of roles, including, but not limited to, overt political action (Toporek & Liu, 2001). For example, the events leading to Larry P. v. Riles (1984), which currently blocks intelligence testing in San Francisco public schools, exemplifies a group of Black psychologists that used its roles as expert witnesses, clinicians, educators, and researchers to engage in political action, policy development, and implementation.

Counseling psychologists have a unique mission, skill set, and field of expertise. That uniqueness does not preclude counseling psychologists from drawing on the experience of related fields to develop ethical guidelines that facilitate, support, and guide intentional and ethical social justice interventions. Furthermore, ethical decision making is facilitated by awareness of ethical complexities that may arise in social justice endeavors. Hence, we turn our attention now to a review of issues that may arise, presenting ethical dilemmas for counseling psychologists.

Ethical Issues, Social Justice, and Counseling Psychology

Several authors have identified ethical issues related to social justice and advocacy in counseling (e.g., Goodman et al., 2004; Kiselica & Robinson, 2001; Toporek & Liu, 2001). Although not exhaustive, six major themes can be distilled from a review of this literature: competence, assumptions and worldview, politics, roles and boundaries, informed consent, and “do no harm.” On the surface, these themes reflect those generally found in ethics discussions. However, their meanings take on different levels of complexity when considered w i t h i n a f r a m e w o r k o f s o c i a l j u s t i c e ; s o m u c h s o t h a t t r a d i t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n s a n d conceptualizations are inadequate. To explore this complexity, we will present dimensions of these six themes followed by a case vignette illustrating a therapist's attention to each of the themes.

Competence

Competence is identified as one of the key elements of the APA Code (APA, 2002). “In those emerging areas in which generally recognized standards for preparatory training do not yet exist, psychologists nevertheless take reasonable steps to ensure the competence of their

SAGE SAGE Reference Copyright © 2006 by Sage Publications, Inc.

Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action

Page 6 of 16

work and to protect clients/patients, students, supervisees, research participants, organizational clients, and others from harm” (APA, 2002, p. 1064).

Because concentrated attention to social justice within counseling psychology is relatively recent, it is reasonable to consider it “an emerging area.” Unfortunately, there has been little examination of what competence means with regard to the practice of social justice. Numerous psychologists have asserted that the profession of counseling and counseling psychology has tended toward individual approaches and intrapsychic explanations for clients' distress (Haverkamp, 1994; Lewis, Lewis, Daniels, & D'Andrea, 1998; Prilleltensky, Dokecki, Friedan, & Wang, in press; Toporek & Pope-Davis, 2005). Given this emphasis, counseling psychologists who work with clients experiencing distress due to external, structural forces run the risk of conveying the belief that the individual is at fault for the injustice he or she is experiencing. Prilleltensky et al. (in press) charged that the counseling profession has been deficient in systemic-level training and neglects the environment and sociopolitical context because of the overemphasis on intrapsychic interventions. It follows that competent practice requires that counseling psychologists need to be trained to recognize the role of external forces in clients' lives and initiating systemic interventions such as advocacy and social action (Toporek & Liu, 2001).

A second aspect of competence reflects professional limitations. Kiselica and Robinson (2001) noted that in order to adhere to the ethical principle of recognizing one's professional limitations, counselors involved in social justice work must avoid being overzealous and making “promises they can't keep” (p. 394). Furthermore, they cautioned that, at times, during activist activities, professionals may become overly enthusiastic and consequently exaggerate the cause. Ethical social justice practice requires that counseling psychologists accurately reflect the people and causes they represent. Similarly, counseling psychologists must be genuine about their ability to take an advocacy or social justice position and acknowledge the limits of their professional ability to do so. This concern may also be reflected by full informed consent (discussed later in this chapter) in that psychologists and clients need to be clear about the means by which, and extent to which, a psychologist may be acting on a client's behalf or acting as an independent professional or individual.

A third aspect of competence reflects the psychologist's awareness of his or her well-being and ability to perform. Dinsmore (as cited in Kiselica & Robinson, 2001) noted,

There is often a high price to pay for being an activist, including feeling emotionally drained, being viewed as a troublemaker, placing your job in jeopardy, and becoming the target of backlash from colleagues at work or of harassment from intolerant individuals. (p. 393)

It is the responsibility of counseling psychologists to monitor and modify practice when their well-being or political situation may negatively affect their work, even when the negative effects result from the stress of challenging oppressive systems. The self-care aspect of competence influences a psychologist's ability to follow through with a course of action agreed upon by the community or client and the psychologist. In addition, competence and well-being may take on special meaning when systemic opposition distracts from client- centered intent and can influence the psychologist's perspective, for better or worse.

Worldview and Assumptions

The virtuous agent [is] one who (a) is motivated to do what is good, (b) possesses

SAGE SAGE Reference Copyright © 2006 by Sage Publications, Inc.

Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action

Page 7 of 16

vision and discernment, (c) realizes the role of affect or emotion in assessing or judging proper conduct, (d) has a high degree of self-understanding and awareness, and, perhaps most importantly is connected with and understands the mores of his or her community and the importance of community in moral decision making, policy setting and character development and is alert to the legitimacy of client diversity in these respects. (Meara, Schmidt, & Day, 1996, pp. 28–29)

The summary of virtuous characteristics provided by Meara et al. highlights some of the critical elements related to the theme of worldview and assumptions. In this context, we are specifically targeting the aspect of worldview that influences the psychologist's perspective of the integrity of the client or community and the assessment of the extent to which the community is able to act on its own behalf. Toporek and Liu (2001) noted that there has been historical criticism of client advocacy based on the assumption that advocating for clients reinforces clients' feelings of helplessness. They acknowledged that the potential for paternalism exists, particularly when a psychologist outside of an oppressed community acts on behalf of that community. However, they also suggested that the intentions of psychologists can moderate the conditions under which advocacy is enacted. This underscores the need for counseling psychologists to be aware of their motives while involved in social justice work as well as their place of privilege based on social class, educational opportunities, race, gender, or other attributes.

The theme of assumptions and worldview also reflects issues of awareness regarding beliefs about what is the “right” thing to do or the “right” way to solve a problem. Goodman et al. (2004) raised this in their discussion of self-evaluation as a tenet of social justice work. This tenet may raise awareness of ethical issues affecting practice, such as in cases of incongruent cultural values between a psychologist and client group.

Dual Roles and Professional Boundaries

Because social justice work often requires systemic interventions, counseling psychologists may be called upon to take on roles that vary from traditional individual counseling. Having engaged in a self-reflective process and illuminated one's intent and assumptions about the client's capabilities, the counseling psychologist is in a better place to assess the context and identify appropriate and effective roles. It is important to note that the issue of competence resurfaces given that training programs historically have provided narrow guidance for counseling psychologists regarding their role with clients with little attention to roles such as advocate, social activist, consultant, and others. Multicultural scholars have noted the need for role variation for some time and have provided models (e.g., Atkinson, Thompson, & Grant, 1993) to help psychologists determine the appropriate role given the client, locus of the problem, and goal of counseling.

In a related vein, current professional standards have also been criticized for the constraints imposed on relationships with clients without consideration of context and culture (e.g., Brown, 1997; Kiselica & Robinson, 2001). Kiselica and Robinson (2001) noted that the issue of boundaries, as traditionally defined in counseling, may need to be revisited when working with marginalized clients who may be uncomfortable or reluctant to seek services in traditional settings. Likewise, being involved in social justice issues may result in clients and psychologists working side by side on a cause, thus raising the issue of dual relationships. Kiselica and Robinson cautioned that although it is appropriate to question definitions of boundaries, it is also important to recognize the validity of the concerns that may arise regarding the best interests of the client.

SAGE SAGE Reference Copyright © 2006 by Sage Publications, Inc.

Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action

Page 8 of 16

Politicizing of Social Justice

Another theme raised in the literature is the acknowledgment that social justice is political. Toporek and Liu (2001) noted that critics have raised concerns that the emphasis on multicultural counseling and social causes in counseling and psychology are used to further political causes. The public interest directorate has reported receiving regular letters from APA members expressing negative reactions that the directorate is taking a political stance by advocating about issues ranging from home lessness to immigration (Tomes, 1997). Whereas psychology has historically held the belief that the field itself is apolitical, there have been criticisms by multicultural and feminist scholars who have argued that psychology has never been apolitical (e.g., Aanstoos, 1986; Marecek, 1995; Prilleltensky, 1994; Smith, 2000). Social justice perspectives openly acknowledge the implicit political nature of asserting that clients and communities have a right to fair treatment; human dignity; and equal access to health care, education, and other resources. When a counseling psychologist examines his or her worldview and considers the implications of various roles, the danger of political and religious proselytizing in professional settings (Kiselica, 2003) is minimized. This examination and reexamination may be enhanced by ongoing collaboration with the community as well as mentors and colleagues.

The political nature of social justice counseling may be seen in Goodman et al.'s (2004) e x a m i n a t i o n o f e t h i c a l i s s u e s r e l e v a n t t o t w o c o u n s e l i n g g o a l s : g i v i n g v o i c e a n d consciousness raising. Giving voice to clients or communities who have traditionally been silenced regarding their experience of oppression represents one aspect of social justice counseling. Difficult decisions may arise when counseling psychologists must choose which voices are amplified through advocacy or even in the choices of research foci. This presents itself particularly when there are limited resources, dissenting perspectives, and goals that may seem self-destructive. Goodman et al. provided an example of a counseling trainee advocating to amplify the voice of a female adolescent who, in the process of counseling, made life choices that were potentially harmful. The ethical dilemma arose for the trainee regarding the balance of giving voice to the adolescent while also working toward her well- being.

Two ethical considerations relate to the goal of consciousness raising. First, Goodman et al. (2004) pointed out that the act of consciousness raising, a political act, suggests that the psychologist has achieved some level of critical consciousness that is superior to that of the client or group. This assumption calls upon the psychologist to examine his or her worldview and beliefs. A second ethical issue may develop as a result of raising a client's consciousness regarding his or her oppressive circumstances in the absence of strategies for coping with or addressing those circumstances. We would like to highlight the need for a partnership between social action and consciousness raising. Furthermore, consciousness raising, in and of itself, may not be sufficient or even desirable if there is no attention to the consequences of the newly acquired perspective and potential for positive action.

Informed Consent

Informed consent is a historically central aspect of ethical practice and research. However, this construct may take on different meanings in social justice counseling, particularly in light of the need to work at multiple levels of interventions. Ensuring informed consent is the practice of providing individuals with information regarding services and interventions, thereby allowing them to make informed choices regarding acceptance and participation in those

SAGE SAGE Reference Copyright © 2006 by Sage Publications, Inc.

Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action

Page 9 of 16

activities. Pope (1990) identified several issues pertaining to informed consent in prevention work and suggested collaborative development of general agreements regarding the methods used in community interventions. In addition, he posed the following questions:

Yet even in the cases of these “general agreement” goals, are we not ethically responsible for examining the implications of what we're asking people to adjust and adapt to? What are the values implicit in this adjustment and adaptation? What are we influencing people to give up and to move toward, and at what personal and social costs? Some methods must be developed for ensuring that the individual's right “to be left alone” is given due weight. (Acting Only With Informed Consent, Paragraph 4)

Similarly, Goodman et al. (2004) noted two specific questions that bring complexity to the issue when multiple individuals or groups are involved: “Whose consent was necessary to obtain?” and “What would we do if some participants did not consent?” (p. 822). These questions highlight intricacies of informed consent that are not often encountered in traditional counseling approaches. The construct of informed consent needs to be enhanced within training and practice to assist psychologists in considering the multiple questions that arise as well as help clients consider the potential consequences of intervention.

Do No Harm

As with accountability and informed consent, the axiom of “Do no harm” needs to be considered differently within the context of social justice. The method of determining the potential for harm may vary depending on the population involved and is complicated when multisystemic interventions are enacted. Pope (1990) discussed the complexity of determining whether a community is harmed by an intervention, including dimensions such as the influence of the intervention on the community's social ecology, natural leadership, cohesiveness, and sense of self-determination. This assessment is further complicated by considering the potential effects of cultural and social class differences between the counseling psychologist and the community. Pope also described the need to assess the impact of a social intervention on the relationship of the community with the larger society using the following example:

For example, a project might be planned to minimize the incidence of serious depression, anxiety, and impulsive behavior in an economically-disadvantaged neighborhood. Yet the disorders to be prevented might be viewed by others than those undertaking the project as a natural response to severe poverty. Attempting to eliminate such reactions to poverty might be a subtle, perhaps unintended, form of social control helping people learn to adapt and adjust to desperate conditions. Such efforts may tend to “quieten” a community or “keep the lid on.” They may hinder the community's ability to identify the true source of its suffering and take effective action. (Do No Harm, Paragraph 12)

Pope (1990) recommended the development of an “impact report” discussing the impact of the intervention on all aspects of community life. In addition, psychologists may need to work with the community to identify the problem and possible interventions, including the possible c o n s e q u e n c e s o f i n t e r v e n t i o n s , i n o r d e r t o e n s u r e i n f o r m e d c o n s e n t . R a i s i n g t h e consciousness of the community about the political context could be crucial.

The principle of Do No Harm may also be relevant when considering Goodman et al.'s (2004)

SAGE SAGE Reference Copyright © 2006 by Sage Publications, Inc.

Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action

Page 10 of 16

discussion of another ethical question. They posited that building clients' strengths and facilitating empowerment may emphasize for the clients the degree of control they “should” have in an oppressive system. Goodman et al. questioned the ethics of working to help clients feel empowered when they are actually in an unresponsive and oppressive system.

The Practice of Social Justice: A Case Vignette

The following is a case vignette that demonstrates a therapist's effort at engaging in ethically sound social justice. Through this case study, we would like to illustrate several of the issues discussed in the above section, articulate how these may or may not have been addressed by the therapist, and conclude by reflecting on ways the therapist may enhance his or her response in light of these issues. This vignette is presented chronologically; thus, there were multiple decision points that could have resulted in different outcomes had the therapist chosen different routes. The reader should be curious about how the therapist engaged in ethical decision making, but should also wonder how he or she might have approached the same situation given age, race, ethnicity, social class, gender, sexual orientation, and disability status similarities or differences.

The Case of the Couple, their Nephew, and the Justice System

A 20-something African American male therapist met with a middleaged, heterosexual, African American couple, who presented because the husband was on a conditional release from the state mental health agency, after being found not guilty by reason of insanity. He had been released for more than 20 years, but had to maintain regular contact with a designated mental health agency. During the regular checkin with the therapist, the couple mentioned that they were distressed because their nephew was being prosecuted for a murder he did not commit. The couple believed their nephew was being truthful. In session, they lamented his fate and the racism that caused him to be jailed and possibly imprisoned.

At this point, the therapist felt that he had some training and competence in addressing sociopolitical forces. Thus, he felt it appropriate to include a social justice approach as an aspect of this case. It is noteworthy that neither the therapist nor the agency had a reputation for social advocacy or justice.

Initially, the couple seemed to be using the therapy time for validation of their feelings of hopelessness in the situation pertaining to their nephew. Thus, the therapist validated their feelings, without agreeing that the situation was hopeless. After the therapist felt satisfied that he had empathized with the couple, he shifted to collaborating with them on what to do next. The couple indicated that they wanted “justice” for their nephew. The therapist asked them to describe what the justice would look like. Their reply was that their nephew would be out of jail. The therapist asked the couple to talk about any solutions they had tried before. They conveyed that they had not tried anything and were resigned to the hopelessness of the situation.

The therapist assessed the couple's competency, assuming that they had already attempted solutions to the problem they described. Hearing that they had not tried any, t h e t h e r a p i s t b e g a n t o s h i f t t o w a r d c o l l a b o r a t i n g o n s o l u t i o n s , r a t h e r t h a n

SAGE SAGE Reference Copyright © 2006 by Sage Publications, Inc.

Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action

Page 11 of 16

paternalistically imposing solutions. At this point, the process of becoming aware of the couple's knowledge and worldview, as well as those of the therapist, allowed the therapist to make informed choices about empowering and appropriate roles. He was operating from his personal principle of “only do for a family what it cannot do for itself.” The therapist, an African American male, who was from a more advantaged social class than the couple, felt it would have been inappropriate to assume that the couple “should” advocate for themselves in the same manner as other middle- and upper-class families might advocate for their relatives in the justice system.

The couple said that they would like to support their nephew in his court appearances and appeals. But they did not see themselves as having any other role in advocating for him. After asking the couple to offer any other ideas on how they could help, the therapist shifted from the role of collaborator to that of expert. He asked the couple if they had ever heard of the attorney general. Because they had not, he described the attorney general as the highest ranking lawyer in the state and explained that it was the attorney general's responsibility to look into concerns they might have about impropriety. The therapist suggested that the attorney general would listen if they, as state citizens, had a legitimate cause and that because the attorney general was an elected official, they had a way to let him know whether he was doing a good enough job.

In the above dialogue, the therapist began to shift away from collaborator and move toward expert because his assessment indicated that the couple was uninformed about their legal options. At the end of the interaction, the therapist became concerned that his advocacy could easily become a public matter, resulting in a possible newsworthy event, and considered how he could maintain appropriate boundaries while also seeing his advocacy reach a reasonable endpoint. This potential highlights the need for informed consent given possible consequences the couple might face if their actions resulted in public attention.

The couple indicated that they did not know what to do, so they were resigned to wait until the court dates. The therapist asked them what outcome they hoped for, to which they replied that their nephew would be home and justice would be served. The therapist obtained the couple's permission to collaboratively problem solve ways to make this possible.

Throughout this session, one can see that the therapist refrained from imposing his social justice agenda. In an effort to ensure informed consent, he sought permission to proceed at each step toward social justice. This is important because psychologists who are involved in social justice may forget that some clients have not given much thought to self-advocacy or may not feel entitled to do so. Thus, psychologists may need to introduce aspects of social justice progressively in an effort to accompany rather than lead clients to action.

Consistent with the principle of not doing more for families than what they can do for themselves, the therapist systematically and collaboratively worked with the couple toward initiating action beyond supporting their nephew in court appearances. This was done by asking the couple if they knew how to identify and contact appropriate government officials, then assisting them in this process using the telephone book to find the state attorney general and local district attorney. As a result of this in-session problem-solving and solution-finding task, the couple indicated that they felt that action

SAGE SAGE Reference Copyright © 2006 by Sage Publications, Inc.

Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action

Page 12 of 16

was possible. The couple then role-played how they might talk to the attorney general or district attorney. The therapist offered the couple the opportunity to make the call from his office, but they decided to make the call on their own. From there, the couple and therapist checked in weekly regarding the matter. Although the wheels of justice were slow, the couple was able to facilitate their nephew's release on bail, pending a second trial.

Reflecting on the Vignette

In the above vignette, the therapist (a) engaged in social justice because he felt he had some competence and training in this area, (b) had an awareness of his beliefs and intentions and was therefore able to collaborate rather than patronize, (c) carefully chose appropriate roles given the context and strengths of the couple as well as established appropriate boundary separation between “behind the scenes” involvement versus more public advocacy, and (d) attempted to maintain informed consent throughout the process.

The therapist's postcounseling reflections suggested that it may have been helpful to inform the couple about additional resources and collaborate with them to discover published resources such as the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, as well as other nonprofit organizations that provided legal advocacy. In addition, establishing complete informed consent would have involved educating the couple regarding any potential negative and positive implications of their advocacy actions as well as the possible duration of advocacy necessary. In the long run, the therapist's goal was to help the couple develop skills that they could generalize in any kind of social justice matter similar to the tenet of “leaving the clients tools for social change,” as described by Goodman et al. (2004, p. 798).

Another ethical concern may result when a therapist encourages a client to engage in a particular action even when there is a good likelihood that the advocated position may fail. It is possible that a state attorney general would be less likely to listen to the above-described couple than an advocacy group. Thus, it can be equally important to realistically prepare the couple for possible response or lack thereof. This is an example of how complex the choices may be in terms of determining an appropriate role and intervention. At times, empowerment of the couple may be enough, whereas at other times, empowerment may be combined with independent action or advocacy on the part of the psychologist independent from the client (Toporek & Liu, 2001). On a final note, this vignette provided an illustration of the “both-and” principle, rather than the “either-or” principle. It is often thought that “either” one engages in social justice “or” one engages in psychotherapy. The therapist endeavored to provide “both” psychotherapy “and” social justice. This parallels literature that emphasizes the need to balance intrapsychic and extrapsychic interventions (e.g., Boyd-Franklin, 2003; Haverkamp, 1994).

Recommendations for Future Developments

In light of existing ethical codes and issues as described in the social justice literature, we propose several recommendations for future directions to optimize ethical behavior and decision making.

First, there is a need for clearer and more direct language in ethics codes regarding the professional responsibility of psychologists to address social injustice. Additionally, specific r e c o m m e n d e d c o m p e t e n c i e s f o r s o c i a l j u s t i c e w o r k w o u l d h e l p g u i d e c o u n s e l i n g

SAGE SAGE Reference Copyright © 2006 by Sage Publications, Inc.

Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action

Page 13 of 16

psychologists and increase informed principled behavior. Feminist, multicultural, and prevention perspectives have established language that may be useful. Several documents provide competencies that are relevant to social justice initiatives (e.g., APA, 1990, 2000). Additionally, other disciplines have developed guidelines that may be very relevant for social justice approaches in counseling psychology. For example, the American Counseling Association has articulated a set of advocacy competencies (Lewis, Arnold, House, & Toporek, 2001) that outlines competencies and goals for counselors at three different levels: client or student, school or community, and larger public arena. The goals include empowerment, collaboration, information, and advocacy. Although this document is specifically focused on advocacy, it offers guidance for defining similar competencies for social justice.

Second, guidelines that could be used for ethical decision making for social justice in individual and community interventions would be useful; for example, the model for ethical decision making described by Ridley, Liddle, Hill, and Li (2001). This model involves two dimensions: stages (critical reflection and creative problem solving) and process (ethical consideration of cultural data and the ethical resolution of cultural conflicts) integrating attention to cultural contexts and implications. This type of model may be useful in social justice counseling given its attention to external and contextual variables.

Third, training programs will need to adjust their curricula to incorporate social justice interventions in order to broaden counseling psychologists' competence. In contrast to Prilleltensky et al. (in press), we believe that counseling psychologists can practice social justice ethically and can develop a scope of competence in this arena. At the same time, we agree that practitioners, researchers, and educators need to be trained to recognize external and systemic forces of oppression and intervene appropriately.

Fourth, research is needed to examine the impact of different ethical decision-making models on clients and counseling psychologists particularly in light of the complexities presented in social justice interventions. In addition, research regarding the efficacy of counseling psychologists undertaking alternative roles would be useful. Qualitative and quantitative research that assists psychologists in developing models for appropriate balance between individual and structural conceptualizations and interventions in counseling could help increase the cultural relevance of work with clients facing a variety of oppressive contexts.

Conclusion

Although the APA Code (2002) notes areas of ethical concern that may be applied to social justice in counseling psychology, complexities exist that suggest that there is a need for clearer guidance. For counseling psychology to truly demonstrate a commitment to positive social change, ethical codes and guidelines should reflect the issues inherent in this work. Related professions, organizations, and specializations that have historically centralized social justice should be considered as resources in the pursuit of more relevant guidelines. Finally, there is a need for more directed training and research to facilitate greater social justice competence at both organizational and individual levels in the profession of counseling psychology.

Rebecca L.ToporekRobert A.Williams

References AanstoosC . M .T h e p o l i t i c s o f p s y c h o l o g yHumanistic Psychologist14(1)19863– 4http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08873267.1986.9976746

SAGE SAGE Reference Copyright © 2006 by Sage Publications, Inc.

Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action

Page 14 of 16

AkbarN.NoblesW.Ethical standards of Black psychologistsPsychological Discourse3220026– 11 American Psychological Association. (1990). Guidelines for providers of psychological services to ethnic, linguistic, and culturally diverse populations. Washington, DC: Author. American Psychological Association. Guidelines for psychotherapy with lesbian, gay, and b i s e x u a l c l i e n t sAmerican Psychologist5520001440–1451http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003- 066X.55.12.1440 American Psychological Association. Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conductA m e r i c a n P s y c h o l o g i s t5720021060–1073http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003- 066X.57.12.1060 AtkinsonD . R .ThompsonC . E .GrantS . K .A t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l m o d e l f o r c o u n s e l i n g r a c i a l / e t h n i c m i n o r i t i e sT h e C o u n s e l i n g P s y c h o l o g i s t21(2)1993257– 277http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011000093212010 Blustein, D., Elman, N., & Gerstein, L.(2001, August). Executive Report: Social Action Groups National Counseling Psychology Conference. Houston, TX: Authors. Bowman, P. J.(1991). Race, class and ethics in research: Belmont principles to functional relevance. In R.Jones (Ed.), Black psychology 3rd ed. (pp. 747–766). Berkeley, CA: Cobb & Henry. Boyd-Franklin, N.(2003). Black families in therapy: Understanding the African American experience (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford. BrownL . S .The private practice of subversion: Psychology as Tikkun OlamAmerican Psychologist521997449–462http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.4.449 Canadian Psychological Association. (2000). Canadian code of ethics for psychologists (3rd ed.). Retrieved July 19, 2005, from http://www.cpa.ca/ethics2000.html CarterR. T.The Counseling Psychologist in the new millennium: Building a bridge from the p a s t t o t h e f u t u r eT h e C o u n s e l i n g P s y c h o l o g i s t3120035– 15http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011000002239395 Feminist Therapy Institute. (1999). Feminist therapy code of ethics. Retrieved November 6, 2004, from http://www.feministtherapyinstitute.org/ethics.htm FouadN . A .McPhersonR . H .GersteinL.BlusteinD . L .ElmanN.HelledyK . I .MetzA . J .Houston, 2 0 0 1 : C o n t e x t a n d l e g a c yT h e C o u n s e l i n g P s y c h o l o g i s t32200415– 77http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011000003259943 GoodmanL . A .LiangB.HelmsJ . E .LattaR . E .SparksE.WeintraubS . R .Training counseling psychologists as social justice agents: Feminist and multicultural principles in actionThe Counseling Psychologist32(6)2004793–837http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011000004268802 HaverkampB. E.Cognitive bias in the assessment phase of the counseling processJournal of E m p l o y m e n t C o u n s e l i n g31(4)1994155–167http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2161- 1920.1994.tb00976.x KiselicaM. S.Insensitivity and anti-Semitism toward Jews by the counseling profession: A Gentile's view on the problem and his hope for reconciliationőA response to Weinrach (2002)Journal of Counseling & Development812003426–440http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1556- 6678.2003.tb00269.x KiselicaM. S.RobinsonM.Bringing advocacy counseling to life: The history, issues, and human dramas of social justice work in counselingJournal of Counseling & Development702001387– 397 Larry P. v. Riles, F. Supp. 926 (N. D. Calif. 1979), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 793 F. 2d 969 (9th Cir. 1984). Lerman, H., & Porter, N.(1990). The contribution of feminism to ethics in psychotherapy. In H.Lerman & N.Porter (Eds.), Feminist ethics in psychotherapy (pp. 5–13. New York: Springer. Lewis, J., Arnold, M . S ., House, R., & Toporek, R . L .(2001). Advocacy Competencies: American Counseling Association Task Force on Advocacy Competencies. Retrieved July 19,

SAGE SAGE Reference Copyright © 2006 by Sage Publications, Inc.

Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action

Page 15 of 16

2005, from http://counselorsforsocialjustice.org/advocacycompetencies.html Lewis, J. A., Lewis, M. D., Daniels, J. A., & D'Andrea, M. J.(1998). Community counseling: Empowerment strategies for a diverse society (2nd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole. MarecekJ.G e n d e r , p o l i t i c s , a n d p s y c h o l o g y ' s w a y s o f k n o w i n gAmerican Psychologist50(3)1995162–163http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.3.162 MearaN. M.SchmidtL. D.DayJ. D.Principles and virtues: A foundation for ethical decisions, p o l i c i e s a n d c h a r a c t e rT h e C o u n s e l i n g P s y c h o l o g i s t2419964– 77http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011000096241002 National Association of Social Workers. (1999). Code of ethics of the National Association of Social Workers. Retrieved July 19, 2005, from http://www.naswdc.org/pubs/code/code.asp PaytonC. R.Implications of the 1992 ethics code for diverse groupsProfessional Psychology: Research and Practice25(4)1994317–320http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.25.4.317 PopeK. S.Ethics and malpractice: Identifying and implementing ethical standards for primary p r e v e n t i o n [ E l e c t r o n i c v e r s i o n ]P r e v e n t i o n i n H u m a n S e r v i c e s8(2)199043– 64http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J293v08n02_04 Prilleltensky, I.(1994). The morals and politics of psychology: Psychological discourse and the status quo. Albany: State University of New York Press. Prilleltensky, I., Dokecki, P., Friedan, G., & Wang, V. O.(in press). Counseling for wellness and justice: Foundations, practice, and ethical dilemmas. In E.Aldarondo (Ed.), Social justice and mental health practices. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Ratts, M., D'Andrea, M., & Arredondo, P.(2004, July). Social justice in counseling: Fifth force in field. Counseling Today,28–30. Ridley, C . R ., Liddle, M. C., Hill, C . L ., & Li, L . C .(2001). Ethical decision making in multicultural counseling. In J. G.Ponterotto, J. M.Casas, L. A.Suzuki & C. M.Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (2nd ed., pp. 165–188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. SmithM . B .V a l u e s , p o l i t i c s , a n d p s y c h o l o g yAmerican Psychologist55(10)20001151– 1152http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.10.1151 TomesH.PI directorate is home to controversyAmerican Psychological Association Monitor on Psychology28(4)19974 Toporek, R. L., & Liu, W. M.(2001). Advocacy in counseling: Addressing race, class, and gender oppression. In D. B.Pope-Davis & H. L. K.Coleman (Eds.), The intersection of race, class, and gender in multicultural counseling (pp. 285–413. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452231846 ToporekR. L.Pope-DavisD. B.Exploring the relationships between multicultural training, racial attitudes, and attributions of poverty among graduate counseling traineesCultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology11(3)2005259–271

social justice psychologists counseling informed consent ethical codes counseling psychology justice

http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412976220.n2

SAGE SAGE Reference Copyright © 2006 by Sage Publications, Inc.

Handbook for Social Justice in Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action

Page 16 of 16