The document discusses ethics and professional issues related to practicing social justice in counseling psychology. It examines how existing ethics codes address social justice work, focusing on the APA Ethics Code. Three key constructs are respect, responsibility, and action. While the APA Code emphasizes respecting cultural differences, clearer guidelines are needed on operationalizing respect when engaging communities. Other codes provide better guidance, such as acquiring knowledge of a community's culture before working there. Challenges around social justice work are also discussed.

1. 1. Evaluate or give an example of an ethical resolution
processes that pertain to conflicting organizational interests.
2. What are some ethical conflicts related to psychological
assessment in forensic cases.
3. Determine actions that are ethically required when
psychological assessment materials are misused
4. What mitigating factors can make resolving ethical issues
difficult in clinical settings?
How can the APA Ethics Code and enforceable standards assist
psychologists in resolving such issues? Ch 4
5. Can the APA Ethics Code assist psychologists in resolving
ethical conflicts with conflicting organizational interests? Why
or why not? Which interests should predominate when
conflicting interests occur? Why? ch 4
6. How can a psychologist minimize the ethical issues related to
conducting a forensic assessment? What actions do the APA
Ethics Code require? What possible challenges could you
encounter?
7. We are to take 'reasonable steps' to maintain ethics in the
workplace. See if you can think of some examples of
reasonable steps for the following:
1. You are a psych intern at a major HMO organization in an
outpatient psych department. You see only children and
adolescents. One practitioner goes by the company rules and if
the child (by no fault of their own) is late for appointments by
1-2 minutes every time. The practitioner refuses to see that
child because then he can spend that hour catching up
on charting of his other clients.
2. You are a psych intern at a rural mental health clinic with
two psychologists to supervise you. One of the psychologists
does not like to teach so won't supervise you. The other
psychologist that does supervise you constantly 'name drops'

2. some of his local celebrity clients issues without it really being
a teaching moment.
3. You are a new psychologist in a midtown practice. You
specialize in eating disorders. One of the other practitioners
refuses to refer eating disordered clients to you because they
want the income from them.
4. You are in a PhD practicum and it is the expectation of the
site that as an intern you go pick up your child clients, see them
in the office, and then return them home in your personal car.
"It's the way we do things here" is the answer as to why it is
done this way.
Class: what could you do in each case?
4. How can psychologist provide ethical information to courts
give an example
The ethical issues reviewed include the role of the psychologist
as an expert witness, matters of competence, informed consent,
confidentiality, multiple relationships, and special issues related
to billing. Emphasis is placed on how psychologists can provide
useful information to the courts in a manner consistent with the
American Psychological Association's (APA; 1992)
References
Knapp, S., & VandeCreek, L. (2001). Ethical Issues in
Personality Assessment in Forensic Psychology. Journal Of
Personality Assessment, 77(2), 242-254.
Notes ROLE OF THE EXPERT WITNESS
A psychologist may be involved in a forensic examination either
as a court-appointed evaluator or as an employee of an attorney.
When attorneys hire psychologists, their work falls trader the
attorney—client privilege, and some courts have ruled that the
attorneys may, after reviewing the reports or comments of the

3. psychologists, choose not to reveal that information in court
(Knapp, VandeCreek, & Fulero, 1993). However, when
psychologists do appear in court, either as a court-appointed
evaluator or an employee of one attorney, they typically assume
the role of an expert witness.
The basic assumption of the Anglo American legal tradition is
that truth is best obtained through an adversarial process by
which two sides confront each other with facts, questions,
information, and evidence. The legal system generates a verdict
in which one side is found guilty/not guilty or liable/not liable,
depending on the nature of the case. The adversarial role differs
considerably from the psychotherapeutic role where
reconciliation, agreement, and cooperation are the norm.
Psychologists perform best as expert witnesses when they
understand and accept the adversarial milieu of the courtroom
setting. Although the exact rules vary from jurisdiction to
jurisdiction, the general role is that expert witnesses provide
information that is outside the expertise of the everyday
layperson. That is, the typical judge or juror would not be
expected to have the in-depth information on a specific topic
that is obtained from the expert witness. The judge allows the
experts to express opinions based on their knowledge of a
particular issue or question. Traditional areas of expert
testimony include medicine, engineering, finances, accounting,
psychiatry, and psychology.
8. Is The Session Over Yet?
After 5 months, despite your efforts to remain objective and
compassionate, you dread seeing this client. He refers to
women, including his girlfriend, as "bitches." He burps
constantly and has an annoying habit of scratching his forehead
every few minutes. He also calls you by your first name, which
you have not invited him to do. Your dislike for him is
increased after every session despite the fact that he seems to be
improving in the areas for which he sought counseling.

4. Did you let this fester for too long? Can you do anything to
alter your negative feelings? Should you terminate him even
though he still has many issues to explore? If so, how? Is it
ethical to challenge his sexism when that issue is unrelated to
his reasons for seeking counseling?
9. Why is this important? Depending on the disability, you may
or may not be qualified to provide the testing. It is important to
think about these issues and address them up front when
accepting an assignment.
Whether a psychologist is admitted as an expert depends on the
judge who reviews his or her education, training, and
experience and how it relates to the specific question before the
court. Opposing counsel can always object to the admission of
the expert witness. However, the judge has the final decision on

5. who is, or is not, an expert.
Psychologists disagree among themselves as to whether they
should be allowed to testify concerning the ultimate question or
issue before the presiding judge (e.g., Who should have custody
of the child? Was the defendant insane at the time of the
murder?). Again, whether a psychologist is allowed to testify on
that issue depends on the presiding judge.
Regardless of whether psychologists do or do not testify on the
ultimate question, the Ethics Code requires that psychologists
base their conclusions from the forensic assessments and their
recommendations “on information and techniques (including
personal interviews of the individual, when appropriate)
sufficient to provide appropriate substantiation for the findings”
(Standard 7.02, p. 14, APA, 1992). The Guidelines for Child
Custody Evaluations in Divorce Proceedings (APA, 1994) go
even further and state that “the psychologist uses multiple
methods of data gathering” (p. 679). It is vital that expert
witnesses present accurate and precise information to the court.
There are many complex issues before the court that do not have
simple answers. For example, there have been some noticeable
improvements over the years in the ability of psychologists and
other mental health professionals to predict violence.
Nonetheless, the best model for predicting violence is analogous
to a meteorological prediction in which the probability of
violence is reported; not a prediction presented in absolute
terms (Monahan & Steadman, 1996).
The requirement for accuracy also means that psychologists
should provide written or oral reports “of the psychological
characteristics of an individual only after they have conducted
an examination of the individual adequate to support their
statements or conclusions” (APA, Standard 7.02(b), p. 14,
1992). Similarly, psychologists should refrain from making
professional statements about persons whom they have not
personally evaluated.
5. What are some ethics and professional issues related to the

6. practice of social justice in counseling
Ethics and Professional Issues Related to the Practice of Social
Justice in Counseling Psychology Next Chapter
Rebecca L. Toporek & Robert A. Williams
Top of Form
Bottom of Form
Show Hide Page Numbers
On This Page
Download PDF
· Citations
· Add to My List
· Share
· Text Size
Citations
Format:
Toporek, R. & Williams, R. (2006). Ethics and professional
issues related to the practice of social justice in counseling
psychology. In R. L. ToporekL. H. Gerstein & N. A. Fouad
Handbook for social justice in counseling psychology:
Leadership, vision, and action (pp. 17-34). Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE Publications Ltd. doi: 10.4135/9781412976220.n2
Toporek, Rebecca L. and Robert A. Williams. "Ethics and
Professional Issues Related to the Practice of Social Justice in
Counseling Psychology." In Handbook for Social Justice in
Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action, 17-34.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2006. doi:
10.4135/9781412976220.n2.
Toporek, R & Williams, R 2006, 'Ethics and professional issues
related to the practice of social justice in counseling
psychology', in Handbook for social justice in counseling

7. psychology: leadership, vision, and action, SAGE Publications,
Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 17-34, viewed 20 March 2017,
doi: 10.4135/9781412976220.n2.
Toporek, Rebecca L. and Robert A. Williams. "Ethics and
Professional Issues Related to the Practice of Social Justice in
Counseling Psychology." Handbook for Social Justice in
Counseling Psychology: Leadership, Vision, and Action.
Rebecca L. ToporekLawrence H. Gerstein and Nadya A. Fouad.
Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2006. 17-34. SAGE
Knowledge. Web. 20 Mar. 2017.
To copy, highlight above text and hit Ctrl-C.
Export: Export
Cancel
Have you created a personal profile? Login or create a profile
above so that you can save clips, playlists, and searches.
Login/Register
Email
*Recipient's Email Address:
*Your Email:
*Your Name:
*Subject:
Message:
Send Me A Copy
Share
Cancel
Font Size
ASmall
ANormal
ALarge
[Page 17]
Ethics and Professional Issues Related to the Practice of Social
Justice in Counseling Psychology
Ethics and professional issues related to the practice of social
justice in counseling psychology

8. 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 [Page 18]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

9. 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)
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

10. counseling professionals adopt in the interest of clients,
including empowerment, advocacy, and social action. (p. 387)
[Page 19]
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

11. 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), 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 [Page 20]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

12. 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

13. 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 [Page 21]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).
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

14. 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
R019
9781412976220
n2
130088
APA
Endnote
S
end
S
ubmit Query