PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 12186085

Multiple relationships: does the new ethics code answer the right questions?

J L Sonne
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The new "Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct" (American Psychological Association, 1992) presented expanded attempts to clarify the ethical issues regarding multiple relationships and to provide useful guidance for psychologists. This article proposes that the new code fails to address adequately two basic questions necessary to provide psychologists with clear guidance: (a) What are multiple relationships? and (b) When do multiple relationships constitute unethical conduct? The article offers a definition of multiple relationships and identifies several dynamics operating within a professional relationship that are likely to be adversely affected by the imposition of a secondary relationship. Unethical multiple relationships are defined. Finally, the article suggests additions to the new code that would enhance its utility for psychologists.

Explore related subjects

Codes of EthicsConflict of InterestEthics, ProfessionalFacultyFemaleHumansInterpersonal RelationsMalePower, PsychologicalProfessional MisconductProfessional RoleProfessional-Patient RelationsPsychologyPsychotherapySexual BehaviorStudentsAmerican Psychological AssociationBioethics and Professional EthicsJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J L Sonne. 1994. Multiple relationships: does the new ethics code answer the right questions?. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.25.4.336

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2003

Boundary issues in social work: managing dual relationships.

Social work literature clearly demonstrates that ethical issues related to boundaries are among the most problematic and challenging. Boundary issues involve circumstances in which social workers encounter actual or potential conflicts between their professional duties and their social, sexual, religious, or business relationships. This article provides an overview of boundary issues in social work (circumstances involving dual and multiple relationships); presents a conceptually based typology of boundary issues in the profession; and provides guidelines to help social workers manage the boundary issues and risks that arise in practice.

Codes of Ethics↗
PubMed2003

Beyond individual rights and freedoms: metaethics in social work research.

Increasingly, social workers are called on to demonstrate the efficacy of their interventions and to contribute to knowledge building in the social sciences. Although social workers have a long tradition of practice ethics, less attention has been given to the unique dimensions of research ethics for social workers. A social work model of research ethics would consider how to balance highly valued ethical principles that are individually focused, such as self-determination and nonmalfeasance (the obligation to do no harm), with equally important values that have a collective focus, such as justice and beneficence (the obligation to bring about good). This article reviews current principles guiding research ethics, such as autonomy, beneficence, nonmalfeasance, and justice and provides an outline of the salient issues for social workers as they strive to address individual and collective interests in research endeavors, such as a greater emphasis on the social justice mission and the need to ensure that social justice objectives do not obscure individual rights and freedoms. The article concludes with preliminary recommendations for developing a social work perspective in research ethics.

Codes of Ethics↗