Case Examine 4 Worksheet
Case four. Analysis on Intimate Companion
Violence and the Obligation to Shield
Dr. Daniela Yeung, a group psychologist, has been conducting a federally funded ethnographic research of males’s attitudes towards intimate companion violence following conviction and launch from jail for spousal abuse. Over the course of a 12 months, she has had particular person month-to-month interviews with 25 contributors whereas they had been in jail and following their launch. Aiden, a 35-year-old male parolee convicted of critically injuring his spouse, has been interviewed by Dr. Yeung on eight events. The interviews have lined a spread of non-public subjects together with Aiden’s downside consuming, which is marked by blackouts and threatening cellphone calls made to his dad and mom and girlfriend when he turns into drunk, often within the night. To her data, Aiden has by no means adopted by way of on these threats. It’s clear that Aiden feels very comfy discussing his life with Dr. Yeung. One night Dr. Yeung checks her answering machine and finds a message from Aiden. His phrases are slurred and offended: “Now that you already know the reality about what I’m you already know that there’s nothing you are able to do to assist the evil inside me. The bottle is my savior and I’ll finish this with them tonight.” Every time she calls Aiden’s house cellphone she will get a busy sign.
Moral Dilemma
Dr. Yeung has Aiden’s handle, and after 2 hours, she is contemplating whether or not or
to not contact emergency providers to go to Aiden’s house or to the properties of his
dad and mom and girlfriend.
Reply to the next questions in 1,500 to 1,750 phrases.
1. Why is that this an moral dilemma? Which Help write my thesis – APA Moral Rules assist body the character of the dilemma?
2. Does this case meet the requirements set by the obligation to guard statue? How may whether or not or not Dr. Yeung’s state consists of researchers beneath such a statute affect Dr. Yeung’s moral determination making? How may the truth that Dr. Yeung is a analysis psychologist with out coaching or licensure in scientific apply affect the moral determination?
three. How are Help write my thesis – APA Moral Requirements 2.01a b, and c; 2.04; three.04; three.06; four.01; four.02; and 10.10a related to this case? Which different requirements may apply?
four. What are Dr. Yeung’s moral options for resolving this dilemma? Which different greatest displays the Ethics Code aspirational precept and enforceable commonplace, in addition to authorized requirements and Dr. Yeung’s obligations to stakeholders?
5. What steps ought to Dr. Yeung take to ethically implement her determination and monitor its results?
Reference
Fisher, C. B. (2013). Decoding the ethics code: A sensible information for psychologists. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
