Essay on ACA Code of Ethics

Identify the Problems

In scenario 2, in the ethical decision making paper scenarios, there are many problems present. The first problem that is presented in that John accepted a Facebook friend request from a current client, Ben. John accepted this friend request without first consulting his site supervisor. The second issue that presented itself when John declined another clients friend request, Jeanne, just on the basis that John does not accept friend requests from women. However, the real reason he denies her request is that John does not like the way Jeanne conducts herself in group. The issues have both professional and ethical problems in nature. The professional issue within this scenario was John’s decision to accept and decline the request he received on Facebook before discussing this decision with his internship site supervisor and or faculty advisor. There are many ethical issues in this scenario. This first that John accepted a client to view his personal social media site. The American Counseling Association or ACA Code of Ethics (2014) explains how virtual relationships with clients tend to distort professional boundaries when the relationship includes the counselor’s personal social media page. This interaction with clients will also raise ethical questions of client confidentiality because of the unsecured messaging application within Facebook. Lastly, John did not treat his clients as equals when he responded by accepting Ben’s request and denying Jeanne’s.

This ethical dilemma presented affects all the parties in the scenario. John, however, plays the major role in generating these issues by the way he responded to the friend requests in an unprofessional and unethical manner. According to Kolmes (2009), it is imperative to understand the reasoning behind Ben and Jeanne finding John on Facebook and the level of comfort they felt with him to try to connect with him on that social media platform. The place John is interning at also has a large role because of their lack or unclear policy regarding their rules considering social media.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place an order

Apply ACA Code of Ethics

The issues in the second scenario have ethical origin and therefore John would need to refer to the ACA Code of Ethics (2014) and see what the code explains about counselors and the personal use of social media. The ACA Code of Ethics (2014) specifically talks about social media. “Counselors are prohibited from engaging in a personal virtual relationship with individuals with whom they have a current counseling relationship (e.g., through social and other media)” (ACA Code of Ethics, 2014, §A.5.e.). The ACA Code of Ethics talks about more technology and social media use in section H. In section H.6.d expresses the need for counselors to safeguard themselves and prevent from sharing confidential information through the use of social media. John should also consider making two different Facebook pages, one for his personal life and one for his professional life and keep them separate. He would not allow his friends to be added to his professional account and would not allow his clients to be added to his personal account (ACA, 2014, §H.6.a.)

Determine the Nature of the Dilemma

According to Forester-Miller and Davis (2016), “Nonmaleficence is the concept of not causing harm to others. Often explained as ‘above all do no harm’, this principle is considered by some to be the most critical of all the principles, even though theoretically they are all of equal weight.” In John’s scenario, it is imperative that he understand how nonmaleficence relates to his decision in being connected with his current clients on social media. Social media is a public platform to share personal opinions and photos as well as to interact with different people. Giota and Kleftaras (2014), explain that an characteristic of the counseling-client relationship is counselors are not sharing information about their personal lives. When John allowed his client, Ben, to be his friend on Facebook, it is a high probability that now Ben will learn aspects of John’s personal life. Being connected on social media with a client poses a high risk of a blurring of the professional line and as a result could cause harm to the therapeutic relationship and to Ben (Giota & Kleftaras, 2014).

Not only does John need to understand decisions could have ended with potential harm towards both clients, John needs to understand the principle of Justice. According to Forester-Miller and Davis (2016), justice does not always mean treating every individual in the same manner but, “treating equals equally and unequals unequally but in proportion to their relevant differences.” “If an individual is to be treated differently, the counselor needs to be able to offer a rationale that explains the necessity and appropriateness of treating this individual differently” (Forester-Miller, & Davis, 2016). John treated his clients unequally when he accepted Ben’s friend request and denied Jeanne’s. The scenario explained John’s reason was not because she was a woman like John told her, but because of her argumentative nature while in group. John has no adequate reason to treat Jeanne differently than Ben and not accept her friend request.

Potential Course of Action

Consider Consequences and Determine Course of Action

Evaluate Course of Action

In the scenario, John enjoys his internship site and the client that are at the center. John reflected this by accepting Ben’s friend request in the need to help Ben feel connected to John. It would be the best course of action for John and his supervisor to move forward with making John a professional Facebook page. This would still allow his clients to have a feeling of connectedness to John without the fear of harm to the client and the therapeutic relationship. The purpose behind John’s actions would need to abundantly clear so that boundaries are not crossed. John’s availability on the page would also need to be addressed but John would also need to know that the clients he accepts on the page may also not respect his boundaries. John would need to be mindful and make his clients conscious that Facebook is not always the most secure and is subject to security breaches. He would need to inform him that even though Facebook may be convenient, email is a more secure way to communicate with John electronically (Zur & Zure, 2011). This act of building a professional Facebook page for John’s clients passes the test of justice. It passes the test of justice because anyone can see and like the page whereas with his personal Facebook page he was able to accept and deny anyone that he wanted allowing room for discrimination. John wants the public to see his professional Facebook page, therefore it also passes the test of publicity. Lastly, it passes the test of universality because any counselor in this position could benefit from this course of action.

Implement the Course of Action

First, John should begin by having an important conversation with his internship site supervisor as well as his faculty advisor. He needs to talk about how he handled the situation with accepting Ben’s Facebook request and denying Jeanne’s. John’s fairness will be brought into question about him declining Jeanne’s request. John will also consult his supervisor about de-friending Ben on Facebook and help walk through the process to help diminish hurt feelings Ben may have and help him not feel rejected by John. John will then need put up profile security on his Facebook page so his clients cannot find him and request him to be their friend. John’s supervisor needs to go over the company’s policy on social media use and if the supervisor feels it is need to help John create a professional Facebook page. This professional page will follow John as he grows and establishes himself professionally in mental health.