Can someone help me with the following case study? I need help explaining the ethical dilemmas using Fisher's Eight Step Ethical Decision-Making Model attached. By using the Steps can you help me with what would be the possible outcome of each individual and what are the benefits and limitations of this model?
Since the nature of the study is only briefly sketched, I had to fill in the blanks for myself.
Remember, these are my views and do not have to be yours.
The ethical dilemma is whether or not to permit the husband the information, or even participate in the study itself.
Develop and sustain a professional commitment to doing what is right.
In this case, we cannot merely ignore the husband. Our decisions should be based on the interests of all parties, including the husband. Under the rubric of "Do No Harm" (3.04), the husband, while not a client, is clearly a part of this equation. Harm to him might be the same as harm to Rosa and her child. We do not know if her husband was abusive until he is convicted. The universal norm is that he is innocent until proven guilty,
Acquire sufficient familiarity with the APA Ethics Code General Principles and Ethical Standards to be able to anticipate situations that require ethical planning and to identify unanticipated situations that require ethical decision making.
Gather additional facts relevant to the specific ethical situation from professional guidelines, state and federal laws, and organizational policies.
In California law, for example, marriage comes with rights and responsibilities. Most of the law has to do with property, but at the root of it all is mutual support. It seems as if the husband is willing to assist in the support of his wife.
It might be reasonable to use a background check service to see if her husband has had any priors in terms of domestic violence. Yet even this is not proof by any means. Practitioners must be careful that they do not permit ideology to destroy human rights (the phrase comes up in the APA code in Principle E. Hence, innocent until proven guilty must be the law here, because it's the law everywhere.
Principle E also states that one cannot use gender or race as decision making tools. To assume that Rosa must be telling the truth falls under this. It is assuming that women do not make up stories or exaggerate domestic abuse for the sake of some other end. Everyone is capable of this. In Rosa's case, she has an interest in ...
Decision-making ethical models are provided. The benefits and limitations of models are given.