Week 11 Discussion Assignment

Week 11 Discussion Assignment

Week 11 Discussion Assignment

Ethical Violations—When Things Go Wrong

Most complaints against clinical mental health counselors are in the areas of competence and conduct (e.g., client abandonment, sexual conduct, dishonesty); business practices (e.g., billing, reports, documentation); and professional practices (e.g., termination referrals, employment opportunities, nonprofessional relationships).

Specific information regarding ethical complaints to state licensure boards, despite its obvious importance, can be difficult to obtain. Complaints can be filed by clients, colleagues, attorneys, or some other interested party, such as an employer or parent of a client. The process of investigating these complaints is quite tedious and can lead to actions or sanctions against the counselor. This, in turn, can affect the counselor’s ability to practice. Clearly, no counselors are exempt from having complaints filed against them; therefore, the best protection is to maintain an ethical practice.

For this Discussion, use the Case Study Analysis Worksheet located in the Learning Resources for this week. Then select one case study from the ACA Ethical Standards Casebook and consider potential consequences of engaging in these violations and how you would safeguard against them in your own counseling practice.

Post by Day 3 a brief description of the case study you selected from the ACA Ethical Standards Casebook. Describe two ethical violations and two instances of professional misconduct presented in the case study. Explain one consequence that may result from each of these situations. Finally, explain what you would do to safeguard against each in your counseling practice.

Be sure to use the Learning Resources and the current literature to support your response.

Required Resources

Note: To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.

Readings

    • Remley, T. P., Jr., & Herlihy, B. (2016). Ethical, legal, and professional issues in counseling (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
      • Chapter 13, “Professional Relationships, Private Practice, and Health Care Plans” (pp. 311-337)
  • Hendricks, B., Bradley, L. J., Brogan, W. C., III, & Brogan, C. (2009). Shelly: A case study focusing on ethics and counselor wellness. The Family Journal, 17(4), 355–359.
    Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
  • Neukrug, E., Milliken, T., & Walden, S. (2001). Ethical complaints made against credentialed counselors: An updated survey of state licensing boards. Counselor Education & Supervision, 41(1), 57–70.
    Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
  • Wilcoxon, S. A., & Magnuson, S. (2002). Concurrent academic and pre-licensure supervision: When supervision is not just supervision. Clinical Supervisor, 21(2), 55–66.
    Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
  • Wilkerson, K. (2006). Impaired students: Applying the therapeutic process model to graduate training programs. Counselor Education & Supervision, 45(3), 207–217.
    Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
  • Herlihy, B., & Corey, G. (2015). ACA ethical standards casebook (7th ed.). Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.
    • “Case Study 2: A Minor (?) Client” (pp. 150-153)
    • “Case Study 20: An Imposition of Values” (pp. 268-271)

Optional Resources

  • Magnuson, S., Black, L. L., & Norem, K. (2004). Supervising school counselors and interns: Resources for site supervisors. Journal of Professional Counseling, Practice, Theory, & Research, 32(2), 4–15.
    Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
  • Welfel, E. R. (2005). Accepting fallibility: A model for personal responsibility for nonegregious ethics infractions. Counseling & Values, 49(2), 120–131.
    Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
  • Wilcoxon, S. A., Norem, K., & Magnuson, S. (2005). Supervisees’ contributions to lousy supervision outcomes. Journal of Professional Counseling, Practice, Theory, & Research, 33(2), 31–49.
    Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

 

week_11_d-1.docx

Case Study

The case study I choose to select was Case Study 2: A Minor Client. This case discusses a High School student named Tommy. Tommy was recently dismissed from the Baseball Team at his High School as a result of his behavior problems. During the time he was on the baseball team, he was involved in a verbal squabble with one of his teachers and than a fight occurred between him and a teammate. In additional to the recent changes in aggressive behavior, Tommy has begun to hang around with an familiar group of friends, that are labeled as trouble makers and drug users. Tommy’s parents are very concerned about his recent behavior and activities at school. Tommy’s grades are on a decline and his parents decide that counseling could help him in ways he may be struggling with (Herlihy & Corey, 2015). Week 11 Discussion Assignment

Ethical Violation & Professional Misconduct

In Tommy’s case there is evidences of drug use issues, as a counselor Ben has to ask himself is this activity create situations where Tommy behaviors in ways he didn’t before? In Section E.1.a of the ACA Code of Ethics (2014) discusses the important of assessments and its primary purpose in gathering information regarding the client for many different purposes from a client’s decision making, to treatment and planning. Assessments are either qualitative and or quantitative methodologies. Ben, the counselor did not ask enough appropriate questions during his assessment with Tommy to establish the severity of the issues he may facing. Ben attached a diagnosis on his client on the bases of information from family and not from Tommy. The second violation Ben had during this session with Tommy was the fact that he violated Tommy’s right by failing to make informed consent (ACA, 2014). During the session he had with Tommy, he is obligated to inform or alert him of the fact of becoming a legal adult and issues that could followed because of the submission of his diagnosis to the insurance company.

Ben also had two instances of misconduct that were presented in the case study, the first being, Ben diagnosed Tommy with substance abuse from instances told by his parents, Ben didn’t consult with the family about a diagnosis and is afraid that let will follow him throughout his career. The ACA Code of Ethics (2014) Standard C.2.a. states that counselors practice only with the boundaries pf their competence, this is the second misconduct found in this case study. Tommy was not given the appropriate assessments that results in a found that Ben billed for.

Consequence

When counselors violate or have instances of professional misconduct, they can result to consequences like being sued or taken to court for malpractice. In Ben’s and Tommy’s case, Ben should have consulted with his supervisor or someone that is familial with issues like this. This is also considered fraud for the wrong or inappropriate diagnosis, this is when a counselor is found guilty of insurance fraud, by not being accurate and in honest.

Recommendation

As a future counselor, there are many ways to safeguard against, misconduct and ethical violations. The first is to increase my understand of the ethics, this can be done through training, and seeking additional education. As a counselor I must know that if I am not trained in assessments and diagnosis that I should refer out, and let my client know their rights each time we began a new session and end one. Week 11 Discussion Assignment

Reference

American Counseling Association (ACA). (2014). 2014 ACA code of ethics [White Paper]. Retrieved from http://www.counseling.org/docs/ethics/2014-aca-code-of-   bethics.pdf?sfvrsn=4

Herlihy, B., & Corey, G. (2015). ACA ethical standards casebook (7th ed.). Alexandria, VA: American         Counseling Association. ◦“Case Study 2: A Minor (?) Client” (pp. 150-153).

https://onlinenursingowl.com/2022/10/25/week-11-discussion-assignment/

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS – Week 11 Discussion Assignment

Who we are

We are a professional custom writing website. If you have searched for a question and bumped into our website just know you are in the right place to get help with your coursework.

Do you handle any type of coursework?

Yes. We have posted our previous orders to display our experience. Since we have done this question before, we can also do it for you. To make sure we do it perfectly, please fill out our Order Form. Filling the order form correctly will assist our team in referencing, specifications, and future communication.

Is it hard to Place an Order?

  • 1. Click on “Order Now” on the main Menu and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
  • 2. Fill in your paper’s requirements in the “PAPER INFORMATION” section and the system will calculate your order price/cost.
  • 3. Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline, and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
  • 4. Click “FINAL STEP” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
  • 5. From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.

SCORE A+ WITH HELP FROM OUR PROFESSIONAL WRITERS – Week 11 Discussion Assignment

We will process your orders through multiple stages and checks to ensure that what we are delivering to you, in the end, is something that is precise as you envisioned it. All of our essay writing service products are 100% original, ensuring that there is no plagiarism in them. The sources are well-researched and cited so it is interesting. Our goal is to help as many students as possible with their assignments, i.e. our prices are affordable and services premium. Week 11 Discussion Assignment

  • Discussion Questions (DQ)

Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, including a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words. Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source. One or two-sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words. I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.

  • Weekly Participation

Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately. In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies. Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work). Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.

  • APA Format and Writing Quality

Familiarize yourself with the APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in Loud-cloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required). Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation. I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.

  • Use of Direct Quotes

I discourage over-utilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Master’s level and deduct points accordingly. As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content. It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.

  • LopesWrite Policy

For assignments that need to be submitted to Lopes Write, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me. Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes. Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own? Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in Loud-cloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score. Week 11 Discussion Assignment

  • Late Policy

The university’s policy on late assignments is a 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies. Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances. If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect. I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension. As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading. Week 11 Discussion Assignment

  • Communication

Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me: Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class. Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.

  • GuaranteeWeek 11 Discussion Assignment

  • Zero Plagiarism
  • On-time delivery
  • A-Grade Papers
  • Free Revision
  • 24/7 Support
  • 100% Confidentiality
  • Professional Writers

  • Services Offered

  • Custom paper writing
  • Question and answers
  • Essay paper writing
  • Editing and proofreading
  • Plagiarism removal services
  • Multiple answer questions

SCORE A+ WITH HELP FROM OUR PROFESSIONAL WRITERS

We will process your orders through multiple stages and checks to ensure that what we are delivering to you, in the end, is something that is precise as you envisioned it. All of our essay writing service products are 100% original, ensuring that there is no plagiarism in them. The sources are well-researched and cited so it is interesting. Our goal is to help as many students as possible with their assignments, i.e. our prices are affordable and services premium. Week 11 Discussion Assignment

Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order a custom-written, plagiarism-free paper

NEED HELP WITH YOUR NURSING ASSIGNMENTS ?

We are dedicated to delivering high quality nursing papers that adhere to the provided instructions, are adequately referenced with the latest scholarly knowledge,

Timely Delivery

Respecting your time and needs, we complete and deliver your orders within the specified timeframe.

Highly skilled writers

We employ experienced and qualified PhD and MD writers able to deal with any types of academic papers

100% unique content

Thorough research and the best academic writing practices ensure complete originality and high quality of every paper we deliver.

Order Now