Description
Create a PowerPoint presentation (minimum 10 slides) that demonstrates the use of professional guidelines and tools that create a strategy for dealing with an ethical dilemma in a simulated case study. Analyze the usefulness of those guidelines and tools.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
[Title for Ethical Dilemma Case
Study]
[Your Name]
[Your job title in the CS]
[Your Organization in the CS]
[Case Study Overview]
[Provide the briefest possible narrative
description of the case situation here. Additional
supporting details and references to evidence
can be added in the notes section below. Review
the instructions in the courseroom for more
information.]
Ethical Concerns
• [Bullet point the three or more ethical
concerns in the case.
• Apply ethical standards to each concern.]
Comparison of [Ethical Theory 1] &
[Ethical Theory 2]
[Ethical Theory 1]
• Feature 1
• Feature 2
• Feature 3
[Ethical Theory 2]
• Comparative feature 1
• Comparative feature 2
• Comparative feature 3
Ethical Decision Making with the
[Name of Model] Model
• [Briefly describe each step of the decision
making model.
• Incorporate multicultural issues.
• Apply each step to your specific case.
• You can combine steps on the slides as
necessary or appropriate.
• Add copies of this slide as needed.
Proposed Resolution
• [Summarize your proposed resolution to the
ethical dilemmas in the case.
• Justify your resolution.]
References
• [Include at least three scholarly research
references for this assignment.
• Web sites, books, textbooks, and other
suggested resources may be used, but do not
count toward the three required references.
You must find research articles.
• Add slides if needed.]
Create a PowerPoint presentation (minimum 10 slides) that demonstrates the use of
professional guidelines and tools that create a strategy for dealing with an ethical dilemma
in a simulated case study. Analyze the usefulness of those guidelines and tools.
Expand All
Introduction
Note: You are strongly encouraged to complete the assessments in this course in the order
in which they are presented.
Ethical principles, professional standards, theories, and decision-making models provide
guides for navigating complex moral choices in professional contexts.
An ethical dilemma is a situation that is difficult to resolve because no course of action will
be a perfect solution. In such situations, critically analyzing and thinking about all
applicable ethical principles and standards is important. Even then, it can be hard to make
ethical decisions, but decisions must be made. Often, avoidance of making a decision is a
decision within itself, and it can bring the worst possible outcome.
The process for solving ethical dilemmas can be multifaceted. You must consider all parts
of a situation in order to make an informed and responsible decision about how to proceed
ethically. The more layers, the more difficult an ethical dilemma is to resolve.
The American Psychological Association’s “Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code
of Conduct” and similar standards developed by other professional organizations are
important sources of guidance. Ethical theories provide general frameworks for evaluating
ethical positions. In addition, ethical decision-making models are important tools to resolve
ethical dilemmas. These two concepts can be confusing.
To deepen your understanding, you are encouraged to consider the questions below and
discuss them with a fellow learner, a work associate, an interested friend, or a member of
your professional community.
•
•
Why are ethics important for practitioners?
What specific values, skills, and knowledge might you need to be ethical in
your planned professional role as a psychological practitioner, educator,
researcher, or organizational change agent?
• What are the main theoretical positions in regard to ethics? Which do you
think are most valuable? Why?
• What ethical dilemmas might arise in your specialization?
• How can ethical codes and standards help?
• What are the strengths and limitations of these ethical codes and standards?
• What are the differences between ethical theories and ethical decisionmaking models? How can each help you in your profession?
• What are your current strengths (specific characteristics, beliefs, attitudes,
knowledge, skills, and behaviors) that contribute to your ethics? What areas do
you need to develop?
Preparation
Note: The assessments in this course build upon each other, so you are strongly encouraged
to complete them in sequence.
Use the Ethics Case Study Template [PPTX] Download Ethics Case Study Template [PPTX]to complete
your Ethics Case Study assessment. Do not submit a paper for this assessment. Papers
will not be graded.
Review Fisher’s Ethical Decision-Making Model to support your work on this assessment.
Capella Multimedia
Click the links provided below to view the following multimedia pieces:
•
•
•
Ethical Theories.
Case Study Scenario Part 1.
Case Study Scenario Part 2.
Download and use the Ethics Case Study Template. You will complete this assessment by
replacing all language that is enclosed with brackets […] in the PowerPoint with your own
words. As in the previous assessment, you may enhance the design of the presentation to
make it more effective. Again, links to tips for using PowerPoint and designing effective
presentations are provided in PowerPoint Resources activity.
The Presentation
Your PowerPoint should include the following:
o
Title slide: On the first slide of the PowerPoint:
o
Enter a descriptive title of approximately 5–15 words that
concisely communicates the heart of the case study. It should stir
interest while maintaining professional decorum.
o
Enter your name, and a job title and organization that would
fit with your case study.
o Case Study Overview slides: Provide the briefest possible narrative
description of the professional conflict in the case. Additional supporting details
and references can be added in the notes section in the slide. The overview
should include:
o
The professional setting of the case.
o
Brief descriptions of the individuals involved and their roles.
o
A brief summation of the ethical dilemma presented in the
case study.
o Ethical Concerns slides: Bullet point three or more ethical concerns in the
case and apply one or more ethical standards to each concern. Additional
supporting details and references can be added in the notes section on the slide.
Be sure to link to elements of the code.
o
Comparison of Ethical Theories slides: In the first row of the provided
table, enter the names of two ethical theories that you think would be the most
appropriate for the situations in the case. In the following rows, enter
comparisons of relevant features of the two theories. In the notes section,
evaluate which theory provides a more functional framework for your case and
explain why. (Note that ethical theories and ethical decision-making models are
two different things. Please make sure you are comparing, contrasting, and
evaluating two ethical theories).
o Ethical Decision-Making Model slides:
o
Choose an ethical decision-making model, and identify each
step in the model.
o
Apply the model to your case and, under each step of the
model, describe how that step would look if you applied it to the
case.
o
Incorporate multicultural issues presented in the case study
within the selected ethical decision-making model.
o
Add copies of this slide as needed, and combine steps on the
slides as necessary or appropriate. In the notes section, write out
supporting narrative details for your bullet points. (Note that ethical
theories and ethical decision-making models are two different things.
Please make sure you are applying steps of the ethical decisionmaking model to your case).
o Proposed Resolution slide: Use bullet points to summarize your proposed
resolution to the ethical dilemmas in the case. In the notes section, write out
supporting narrative details for your bullet points.
o References slides: Use current APA style and formatting guidelines.
o
Citation requirements: You must cite at least three scholarly
research articles. You may cite reputable sources form Web sites,
books, textbooks, and suggested resources as well, but these will not
count toward the three required scholarly research references.
Additional Requirements
•
Written communication: Should be free of errors that detract from the
overall message.
• Format: Use the Ethics Case Study Template linked above. Use current
APA style and formatting guidelines as applicable to this assessment.
• References: Three scholarly research articles.
• Length of PowerPoint: A minimum of 10 slides.
Competencies Measured
By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the
following course competencies and assessment criteria:
•
Competency 1: Apply ethical principles and standards to ethical dilemmas.
o
Ethical Concerns: Apply ethical standards to ethical concerns
pertaining to a case study.
• Competency 2: Employ models of ethical reasoning and ethical decision
making.
o
Ethical Theory: Analyze ethical theories and justify
application of one theory in an attempt to resolve the ethical
dilemma in the case study.
o
Ethical Decision Making: Apply steps in an ethical decisionmaking model to an ethical dilemma in the case study.
o
Solution: Design a viable solution for an ethical problem.
• Competency 5: Communicate in a manner that is scholarly, professional, and
consistent with expectations for members of the psychological professions.
o
Communication: Write clearly, with correct spelling,
grammar, syntax, and good organization, following APA style
standards.
Fisher’s Ethical Decision-making Model
Ethical reasoning models have been posited to help you think about how you approach
ethical dilemmas. It is “why” we make a decision. In this assessment, you will be
researching ethical theories and applying them to an ethical dilemma. Note that ethical
theories are not theoretical orientations. You should not attempt to mesh an ethical
theory with your professional identity. Rather, you should consider the utility of all of the
theories.
Ethical decision-making models describe “how” we go about making an ethical decision. In
Fisher’s 2023 book, Decoding the Ethics Code, she proposes a highly recommended eightstep ethical decision-making model:
•
Step 1: Develop and sustain a professional commitment to doing what is
right.
•
Step 2: Acquire sufficient familiarity with the APA’s “Ethical Principles of
Psychologists and Code of Conduct” to anticipate situations that require ethical
planning and to identify unanticipated situations that require ethical decision
making.
•
Step 3: Gather additional facts relevant to the specific ethical situation from
professional guidelines, state and federal laws, and organizational policies.
•
Step 4: Make efforts to understand the perspective of different
stakeholders who will be affected by the decision and consult with colleagues.
•
Step 5: Apply Steps 1 to 4 to generate ethical alternatives and evaluate each
alternative in terms of moral theories, general principles and ethical standards,
relevant laws and policies, and consequences to stakeholders.
•
Step 6: Select and implement an ethical course of action.
•
Step 7: Monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the course of action.
•
Step 8: Modify and continue to evaluate the ethical plan if feasible and
necessary.
This model takes into consideration the importance of ethical commitment, awareness,
and competence, and is designed to help you start the process of learning how to make
sound ethical decisions. Interestingly, this decision-making model mirrors the three stages
of therapy: exploration, insight, and action. Steps 1–3 are focused more on exploring the
whole ethical dilemma. For example, Step 2 suggests that you familiarize yourself with the
standards that apply to this situation and anticipate any further ethical issues that may
arise in the situation. Steps 4–5 promote insight into the ethical situation in question. Step
4 proposes that you consider the impact of the situation on all parties involved, not just
yourself. Last, Steps 6–8 encourage taking action in the situation.
Reference
Fisher, C. B. (2023). Decoding the ethics code: A practical guide for psychologists (5th ed.).
Sage.
Part 3
Hide All
Deontology
The ethical position to do what is right out of duty or obligation. It is often
called rule-based ethics.
Deontology has been described as “absolutist,” “universal,” and
“impersonal” (Kant, 1785/1959). It prioritizes absolute obligations over
consequences. In this moral framework, ethical decision making is the
rational act of applying universal principles to all situations irrespective of
specific relations, contexts, or consequences. This reflects Immanuel
Kant’s conviction that ethical decisions cannot vary or be influenced by
special circumstances or relationships. Rather, a decision is “moral” only
if a rational person believes the act resulting from the decision should be
universally followed in all situations. For Kant, respect for the worth of all
persons was one such universal principle. A course of action that results
in a person being used simply as a means for others’ gains would
ethically unacceptable.
With respect to deception in research, from a deontological perspective,
since we would not believe it moral to intentionally deceive individuals in
some other context, neither potential benefits to society nor the
effectiveness of participant debriefing for a particular deception study can
morally justify intentionally deceiving persons about the purpose or nature
of a research study. Further, deception in research would not be ethically
permissible since intentionally disguising the nature of the study for the
goals of research violates the moral obligation to respect each
participant’s intrinsic worth by undermining individuals’ right to make
rational and autonomous decisions regarding participation (Fisher &
Fyrberg, 1994).
Utilitarianism
The ethical position depends on the consequences of the action with the
goal being producing the most good.
Utilitarian theory prioritizes the consequences (or utility) of an act over the
application of universal principles (Mill, 1861/1957). From this
perspective, an ethical decision is situation specific and must be
governed by a risk-benefit calculus that determines which act will produce
the greatest possible balance of good over bad consequences. An “act
utilitarian” makes an ethical decision by evaluating the consequences of
an act for a given situation. A “rule utilitarian” makes an ethical decision
by evaluating whether following a general rule in all similar situation would
create the greater good. Like deontology, utilitarianism is impersonal: It
does not take into account interpersonal and relational features of ethical
responsibility. From this perspective, psychologists’ obligations to those
with whom they work can be superseded by an action that would produce
a greater good for others (Fisher, 1999).
A psychologist adhering to act utilitarianism might decide that the
potential knowledge about social behavior generated by a specific
deception study could produce benefits for many members of society,
thereby justifying the minimal risk of harm and violation of autonomy
rights for a few research participants. A rule utilitarian might decide
against the use of deception in all research studies because the unknown
benefits to society did not outweigh the potential harm to the discipline of
psychology if society began to see it as an untrustworthy science.
Communitarianism
The ethical position in which the right action is derived from a
community’s values and traditions.
Communitarian theory assumes that right actions derive from community
values, goals, traditions, and cooperative virtues. Accordingly, different
populations with whom a psychologist works may require different
conceptualizations of what is ethically appropriate (MacIntyre, 1989;
Walzer, 1983). Unlike deontology, communitarianism rejects the elevation
of individual over group rights. Whereas utilitarianism asks whether a
policy will produce the greatest good for all individuals in society,
communitarianism asks whether a policy will promote the kind of
community we want to live in (Steinbock et al., 2003).
Scientists as members of a community of shared values have traditionally
assumed that (a) the pursuit of knowledge is a universal good and that (b)
consideration for the practical consequences of research will inhibit
scientific progress (Fisher, 1999; Sarason, 1984; Scarr, 1988). From this
“community of scientists” perspective, the results of deception research
would deprive society of this knowledge. Thus, communitarian theory may
be implicitly reflected, at least in part, in the acceptance of deception
research in the APA Ethics Code (Standard 8.07, Deception in Research)
and in current federal regulations (Department of Health and Human
Services [DHHS], 2009) as representing the values of the scientific
community. At the same time little is known about the extent to which the
“community of research participants” shares the scientific community’s
valuing of deception methods (Fisher & Fyrberg, 1994).
Feminism
The ethical position to act on behalf of persons with whom one has a
significant relationship.
Feminist ethics, or an ethics of care, sees emotional commitment to act
on behalf of persons with whom one has a significant relationship as
central to ethical decision making. This moral theory rejects the primacy
of universal and individual rights in favor of relationally specific obligations
(Baier, 1985; Brabeck, 2000; Fisher, 2000; Gilligan, 1982). Feminist
ethics also focuses our attention on power imbalances and supports
efforts to promote equality of power and opportunity. In evaluating the
ethics of deception research, feminist psychologists might view intentional
deception as a violation of interpersonal obligations of trust by
investigators to participants and as reinforcing power inequities by
permitting psychologists to deprive persons of information that might
affect their decision to participate.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
