Assignment # 1 : Ethical Problem Solving
Dilemma 1
Kathy Pepper
Student ID # 5860952
CARD1010; Professional Ethics, Interviewing and Counseling
May 27, 2009
Kathy Pepper
May 27, 2009
Student ID # 5860952
Page 1
Dilemma 1
You are working on a summer contract in a youth employment-counseling center. The
company has a reputation for doing good work and has some of the local leaders in the field
of employment are involved as counseling staff.
Through the internal grapevine, you learn that the financial situation of the center is not
stable because they have lost some of their major funding due to government cutbacks.
The center uses “employment” as their only criteria to measure their success.
You have been assigned to a project that is focused on youth with multiple barriers to
employment, such as drug and alcohol problems, truancy and no history of solid gainful
employment. Each client is expected to attend 6 sessions of 3 hours each. To stay in the
program, they cannot miss any sessions. There are no exceptions. As you start working with
the youth group, you note several absences.
If you report all the absences in an honest fashion, the center will likely lose funding and the
clients will not get the support they need to deal with the very problems that are hindering
them from becoming employed.
Working through the ethical dilemma worksheet, what is your resolution?
Kathy Pepper
May 27, 2009
Student ID # 5860952
Page 2
1.The ethical standard or principle involved.
Canadian Standards and Guidelines for Career Development Practitioners, Code of Ethics,
2004, reference 2 (a): “Integrity, honesty, objectivity”.
Canadian Standards & Guidelines For Career Development Practitioners; Areas of
Specialization, Career Counselling, 2004: under “Establish and maintain a collaborative
relationship with clients”:, sub points (a) through (e), particularly counselor demonstrating
professional attributes (reference C1.1.2) and communication skills (reference C2.2);
maintaining collaborative work relationships (reference C2.2.6); client focused
regarding client expectations, needs and goals and providing information to clients on all
service options available.
An “internal grapevine” could indicate possible lack of effective communication channels and
client focused planning, regarding meeting client needs / goals and providing information to
clients.
To stay in the program – following agency program “rules”.
Minors – check implications.
Legal issue – potential – due to governmental funding provisions if tied to specified reporting
on attendance; even if not, implication to center and funding due to unethical behavior;
sanctions (personally, professionally, center, and the larger profession in terms of credibility)
1.Ethical trap possibilities.
The “commonsense, objectivity trap” (The Ethical Decision-Making Manual For Helping
Professionals, Steinman, Richardson, McEnroe, 1998 Brooks/Cole, Cengage Learning. pp 3-5)
Kathy Pepper
Student ID # 5860952
May 27, 2009
Page 3
could apply in terms of the counselor's / other world views – as in participation in grapevine
as acceptable. The“circumstantiality trap” (Ibid. pp 7-9) may be a consideration, with
perceived loss of funding possibility “justifying” dishonest reporting, as well applied to the
assumption “clients will not get the support they need”. The “who will benefit trap” (ibid. pp
9-10) may apply also in this assumption, as well as in the question of dishonest reporting
where the counselor may feel this is putting client needs first, whereas in fact it does not
meet short or the more important long term interests of the client. In looking at “the ethical
hierarchy” (ibid. pp 10-11), dishonest reporting would contradict “refrain from any behavior
that would jeopardize their ability to work in their professional field”, as well as “when
professionals have an ethical choice to make, they should ensure that in doing so they do not
put themselves in a position that might limit or eliminate their value as professionals to
others” (ibid). Dishonest reporting would not satisfy current or future client needs, nor this
professional or other professionals, and possibly adversely affect helping services and funding
considerations.
The comments in the dilemma statement regarding the center's “reputation for doing good
work” and the reference to local leaders in the employment field being involved in counseling,
dishonest reporting could / should adversely affect both circumstances. it also raises concern
about the validity of these statements if indeed there is an internal acceptability of dishonest
reporting (versus understanding and application of appropriate code of ethics), and poor
communication, for example with the internal grapevine as source (versus open
communication and client focus).
Kathy Pepper
Student ID # 5860952
May 27, 2009
Page 4
3.Preliminary Response
Consult with supervisor and ask about what you heard in terms of the financial picture and
discuss openly your perceived dilemma about reporting the absences. If your supervisor says
the information in the grapevine is incorrect, ask for relevant information on the center (that
may not have been covered in recruitment / orientation), discuss with supervisor how
communication channels can best work so you can meet all stakeholders interests. Be ready
to offer suggestions. Be very open about your perceived dilemma around reporting so you
can address that ethically and professionally. Discuss the effectiveness of the program you are
leading, the client profile and the success criteria, be ready to make suggestions and to be
available to participate in any further dialogue. Discuss what happens next now and after your
contract to the clients / program.
If on discussing the rumor with your supervisor, your supervisor indicates that it is true, all of
the above would apply I believe, plus the need perhaps for legal support. If funding is
contingent on specifics of the program including mandatory attendance, the scope of the past
problem and the implications for the future need addressing. Without minimizing addressing
that very important piece, is it possible to propose and validate a program change to better
meet client and stakeholder best interests which would modify the attendance requirement,
perhaps adding different components to support the client profile / needs, and lastly
reviewing success criteria for center programs? If the rumor is correct, it is important to
appropriately inform affected clients and begin to provide for effective information exchange,
referrals and follow up.
Kathy Pepper
Student ID # 5860952
May 27, 2009
Page 5
If on discussing the rumor with your supervisor, your supervisor indicates it is true and
attendance is a requirement under the funding arrangement, and you are to ignore absences
(although this would appear to contradict the dilemma information regarding “no
exceptions”), then a discussion with a trusted experienced colleague is suggested and
connection with the ethical body for the field is required. Taking care of your clients for
continued care is then important as well as the need to resign the position due to the ethical
standing as well as addressing your own ethical position as you debated this issue.
4. Possible consequences of adopting this response.
Where the rumor is incorrect, the existence of a grapevine discussion of this topic as an
example, in an organization which is known for “good work” and with “leading” employment
sector counselors may indicate an ethics and communications issue. The consequences of
addressing these issues openly may bring short and long term discomfort to the organization
and its members. It may also bring renewal and refocus, with an opportunity to review and
reaffirm ethical expectations, create better communication channels, undertake program
effectiveness reviews and examine center measures of program success which could perhaps
better support funding applications while reflecting more accurate measures of client needs
being met and goals supported. The consequences of not addressing the issue if the rumor
is incorrect, is possibly perpetuating poor communication channels (“internal grapevine”) and
misinformation (as in the circumstances of the dilemma), which may affect center
performance in being able to meet client needs and professional obligations and losing what
the dilemma suggests as a point of pride, a center that “does good work”.
Kathy Pepper
Student ID # 5860952
May 27, 2009
Page 6
Where the rumor is correct, all of the above. An additional consequence is a needed review
on attendance reporting in terms of its relevance to government funding. Legal support is
important. Another consequence are sanctions. Most important, the consequences to the
clients, who from the dilemma's client profile information, may view the center's behavior
contradicting their needs / goals, creating a trust issue that needs to be rebuilt with better
programs in the long term; in the short term, their best interests have been compromised and
a consequence may be a problem in finding alternate support that can meet their needs (I
am thinking of where government funds have been allocated to this center versus another).
5. Ethical Resolution
I would follow the preliminary response. My personal thoughts on this resolution is that I am
satisfied with it. I struggled through it. As I am new to the field I am looking forward to
feedback to see other ways I may have addressed this. In the new counselor raising the
concern, there may be an opportunity for positive change. However, the new counselor still
had a personal dilemma in what to do, signaling likely activation of the “traps” and a need to
revisit the profession's ethical base.