Abstract
This chapter presents a detailed explanation of the five core ethical principles being proposed for reworking the APA (American Psychological Association, American Psychologists, 57, 1060–1073, 2002; Ibid., Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct, 2010) ethics code and for developing a universal mental health ethics code. For example, in this regard, given that the book is proposing a totally new ethical principle for the ethics code under consideration concerning Life Preservation (e.g., with respect to issues of suicidality, homicidality, torture, child abuse and neglect), the chapter elaborates in depth this principle. For each of the five proposed core principles for the APA ethics code, the chapter specifies five sub-principles. The second part of the chapter presents five proposed supplementary ethical principles to the five revised core principles being proposed for the APA ethics code and toward creating a universal mental health ethics code (after Young, Medicine and Public Health, 2, 220-237, 2016). These five supplementary ethical principles concern science, law, assessment (2), and ethics as a system. As with the approach for the five core principles proposed, the chapter lists five sub-principles for each supplementary principle.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
We can examine the clinical function or patient/client contact in our work, in light of the five core psychological ethical principles being proposed toward revising the APA ethics code and creating a universal mental health ethics. This domain reveals that all the principles apply equally to this type of contact. They all speak to this role or domain and perhaps more than others, given the helping nature of the profession of psychology. In this regard, we do not condone, conduct, or otherwise allow or promote torture or equivalent practices and are attuned to their risk or occurrence with our patients/clients. As mentioned, we deal with them with the greatest Relational Integrity, openness, mutuality, etc. We are alert to their rights, dignity, requirements for social justice, and so on. Overall, we adopt an ethics of helping them, doing “good” for them, and not harming them.
To elaborate, psychologists know, respect, and function within the parameters of applicable laws, professional regulations and guidelines, and organizational requirements. That said, they are not obligated to violate ethical principles and to engage in unethical behavior just because the poor way any of the following are written: extant law, rule, regulation, standard, or guideline, or tract of other governing legal or related authority. Psychologists never allow such structures to lead them to violate human rights, or defend or justify such violation. That is, in their clinical work, psychologists know all relevant extant laws, statutes, standards, etc., that govern the profession and their professional governing conduct, act within their bounds, and, as appropriate, attempt to clarify and resolve any ethical conflicts related to them using reasonable steps while taking, where possible, parallel steps and even formal complaints to inform about any injustices to persons/peoples, the profession, or relationships due to these inappropriate laws, regulations, etc.
References
American Educational Research Association (AERA), American Psychological Association (APA), & National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME). (2014). The standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologists, 57, 1060–1073.
American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct (2002, Amended June 1, 2010). Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/principles.pdf
American Psychological Association. (2013). Specialty guidelines for forensic psychology. American Psychologists, 68, 7–19.
Ben-Porath, Y., & Tellegen, A. (2008/2011). Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Restructured Form: Manual for administration, scoring, and interpreting. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Bray, J. H., & Stanton, M. (2013). The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of family psychology. West Sussex, England: Wiley-Blackwell.
Bush, S. S., Heilbronner, R. L., & Ruff, R. M. (2014). Psychological assessment of symptom and performance validity, response bias, and malingering: Official position of the association for scientific advancement in psychological injury and law. Psychological Injury and Law, 7, 197–205.
Canadian Psychological Association. (2000). Canadian code of ethics for psychologists (3rd ed.). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Author.
Canadian Psychological Association. (2017). Canadian code of ethics for psychologists (4th ed.). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Author.
Chmielewski, M., Zhu, J., Burchett, D., Bury, A. S., & Bagby, R. M. (2017). The comparative capacity of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) and MMPI-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) validity scales to detect malingering in a disability claimant sample. Psychological Assessment, 29, 199–208.
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals. (1993). 509 U.S. 579.
Fisher, C. B. (2017). Decoding the ethics code: A practical guide for psychologists. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013, 34 ALR 145 (D. C. Cir. 1923).
Ingram, P. B., & Ternes, M. S. (2016). The detection of content-based invalid responding: A meta-analysis of the MMPI-2-Restructured Form’s (MMPI-2-RF) over-reporting validity scales. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 30, 473–496.
International Union of Psychological Science. (2008). Universal declaration of ethical principles for psychologists. Retrieved from http://www.iupsys.net/about/governance/universal-declaration-of-ethical-principles-for-psychologists.html
Knapp, S. J., Gottlieb, M. C., Berman, J., & Handelsman, M. M. (2007). When laws and ethics collide: What should psychologists do? Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 38, 54–59.
Nguyen, C. T., Green, D., & Barr, W. B. (2015). Evaluation of the MMPI-2-RF to detecting over-reported symptoms in civil forensic and disability setting. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 29, 255–271.
Pope, K. S. (2016). The code not taken: The path from guild ethics to torture and our continuing choices. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 57, 51–59.
Robinson, E. V. (2016). Feigning ADHD: Effectiveness of selected assessment tools in distinguishing genuine from simulated ADHD (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Denton, TX: University of North Texas.
Sharf, A. J., Rogers, R., Williams, M. M., & Henry, S. A. (2017). The effectiveness of the MMPI-2-RF in detecting feigned mental disorders and cognitive deficits: A meta-analysis. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 1–15. doi:10.1007/s10862-017-9590-1
Wall, T. D., Wygant, D. B., & Gallagher, R. W. (2015). Identifying overreporting in a correctional setting: Utility of the MMPI-2 restructured form validity scales. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 42, 610–622.
World Health Organization. (2018). International Classification of Disease, 11th Revision.
Young, G. (2014). Resource material for ethical psychological assessment of symptom and performance validity, including malingering. Psychological Injury and Law, 7, 206–235.
Young, G. (2016). A broad ethics model for mental health practice. Ethics, Medicine and Public Health, 2, 220–237.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Young, G. (2017). The Five Core and the Five Supplementary Ethical Principles and Their Sub-principles. In: Revising the APA Ethics Code. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60002-4_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60002-4_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-60001-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-60002-4
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)