Walden Coun6306 Week 6 Assignment: Boundaries

After clicking on a citation below, enter your myWalden user name and password at the prompt.

Please Ask a Librarian if you have any questions about the links.

Ben-Zeev, D. (2017). Technology in mental health: creating new knowledge and inventing the future of services. Psychiatric Services, 68(2), 107-108.

Edwards, G. (2013). Tarasoff, duty to warn laws, and suicide. International Review of Law and Economics, 34, 1-8.

Ery?lmaz, A., & Mutlu, T. (2017). Developing the four-stage supervision model for counselor trainees. Kuram Ve Uygulamada E?itim Bilimleri, 17(2), 597-629. doi:10.12738/estp.2017.2.22523

Estates of Morgan v. Fairfield Family Counseling Center (1997), 77 Ohio St. 3d 284, 285.

Fisher, M. A. (2016). Step 1. Prepare to protect confidentiality rights. In, Confidentiality limits in psychotherapy: Ethics checklists for mental health professionals (pp. 27-36). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/14860-003

Herlitz, A., Munthe, C., Törner, M., & Forsander, G. (2016). The counseling, self-care, adherence approach to person-centered care and shared decision-making: moral psychology, executive autonomy, and ethics in multi-dimensional care decisions. Health Communication, 31(8), 964-973.

Kaplan, D. M., Francis, P. C., Hermann, M. A., Baca, J. V., Goodnough, G. E., Hodges, S., Spurgeon, S. L., Wade, M. E. (2017). New Concepts in the ACA Code of Ethics. Journal of Counseling & Development, 5(1), 110-120, 11.

Merriman, J. (2015). Enhancing counselor supervision through compassion fatigue education. Journal Of Counseling & Development, 93(3), 370-378. doi:10.1002/jcad.1203

Nielsen, B. A. (2015). Confidentiality and electronic health records: Keeping up with advances in technology and expectations for access. Clinical Practice In Pediatric Psychology, 3(2), 175-178. doi:10.1037/cpp0000096

Peterson, J. (2017). Bringing counselor expertise to court: Counseling professionals’ knowledge related to human development, ethical behavior and systems can position them to serve as expert witnesses across a wide range of cases. Counseling Today, 62(5), 64-69.

Wheeler, A. (2017). The pitfalls of serving as both treating counselor and expert witness. Counseling Today, 62(5), 10.

Wilkinson, T. W. ed., Smith, D., & Wimberly, R. (2019). Trends in Ethical Complaints Leading to Professional Counseling Licensing Boards Disciplinary Actions. Journal of Counseling & Development, 97(1), 98–104. doi:10.1002/jcad.12239

Coun 6306 Week 2 Assignment: Comparing Codes of Ethics

[First and Last Name]

COUN 6306 Ethics and Legal Issues

Walden University

Week 2 Assignment: Comparing Codes of Ethics

Both the American Counseling Association’s (ACA) Code of Ethics and the American Mental Health Counseling Association’s (AMHCA) Code of Ethics serve as a resource and guideline for professional counselors, educators, and students to provide ethical conduct and practice with clients, peers, and other professionals. The codes help with the ethical decision-making process, and they provide clients with information relevant to what can be expected from a counselor to receive the best possible care. This paper addresses some of the similarities and differences found in the two codes and concludes with some final remarks.

Similarities Between the ACA and AMHCA Codes of Ethics

When it comes to similarities, both codes share a similar structure, guiding professionals through some of the fundamental themes concerning ethical conduct. For example, the counseling relationship is one of the primary interests addressed by both associations (ACA, 2014, A.; AMHCA, 2015, I.A.). Within the relationship context, the primary responsibility towards the client shares equal values (e.g. respect dignity, promote welfare; ACA, 2014, A.1.; AMHCA, 2015, I.A.1.a). Confidentiality is equally highly regarded and offers a specificity that establishes a valuable framework for counselors to navigate from the respect for a client’s privacy and confidentiality to some of the exceptions that may allow their breach (ACA, 2014, B; AMHCA, 2015, I.A.2.). Other examples include the counseling process (ACA, 2014, A.1.–4.; AMHCA, 2015. I.B.1.–2.), boundary crossings and violations (ACA, 2014, A.6.; AMHCA, 2015, I.A.3.–4.), multiple roles and relationships (ACA, 2014, A.6.–9..; AMHCA, 2015, I.B.3.–4.), and a counselor’s competence (ACA, 2014, C.2.; AMHCA, 2015, I.C.1.).

Another area that both codes cover as part of their ethical considerations is that of the professional responsibilities regarding public service including research. Both the ACA and AMHCA address the topics of advocacy for clients, commitment to furthering research, and serving in a capacity benefiting the public (ACA, 2014, A.7.a.–b., G.; AMHCA, 2015, I.F.2., II.). They also establish ethical considerations regarding everyday business practices, such as record keeping, sharing information, handling technology, social media, and distance counseling (ACA, 2014, A.2., D., H.; AMHCA, 2015, I.B.2., I.E., II.). Finally, both codes acknowledge the importance of education and supervision to provide a solid foundation for student counselors to thrive in the profession (ACA, 2014, F.; AMHCA, 2015, III.).

Differences Between the ACA and AMHCA Codes of Ethics

Some of the main differences between the ACA and AMHCA codes relate to their specificity. The ACA code tends to provide more clarity and detail. This is especially noticeable in areas such as confidentiality (ACA, 2014, B.; AMHCA, 2015, I.A.2.). For example, the exceptions to keeping confidentiality are more specifically defined in the ACA code (ACA, B.2.); so is the sharing of confidential information with others (B.3.). Further, the information on supervision, training, and teaching is more clearly defined and structured in the ACA code to make it more readable and provide a better sense of roles and relationships within such a context (ACA, 2014, F.; AMHCA, 2015, III).

Overall, the ACA also seems to put more emphasis on cultural competency, addressing possible conflicts between a counselor’s and client’s attitudes, values, and beliefs (ACA, 2014, A.2.c., B.1., C.2.a., C.5., E.5.b., E.8., F.2.b., F.7.c., F.11., H.5.d.), even though the AMHCA recognizes the importance of embracing diversity while not with as much rigor (AMHCA, 2015, I.A.4., B.1., C.1., D.2.). Judging by the growing concern for multicultural sensitivity, it should be expected for the AMHCA to expand on this particular matter. Another considerable difference between the two codes is found in the resolution of ethical conflict. The ACA code is much more comprehensive and provides a good foundation for both counselors and clients to consult in the event (ACA, 2014, I.; AMHCA, 2015, VII.). Finally, the ACA offers a more rounded preamble and statement of purpose to focus on the philosophical underpinnings of its code (ACA, 2014, p. 3), and it includes a handy index (pp. 21–23) for quick reference.