Abstract
Ethics in its most basic form refers to doing what is right. This article focuses on four ethical traps to help couple and family counselors not only recognize ethical traps but in addition to understand how to avoid and solve ethical traps. To help the couple and family counselor better understand the principles involving ethical traps, four case studies are presented.
“Tell me and I will forget. Show me, and I will remember. Involve me, and I will understand”.
The term ethics comes from the Greek word ethos, which refers to character, dispositions, and customs (Cambridge Dictionary, n.d.). Ethics has long been characterized as a major cornerstone for mental health professionals generally and for couple and family counselors, specifically. Although ethics is a contemporary term, it is not new. In fact, the history of ethics dates back to ancient Greek philosophers like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. One of the philosophers, Plato, has been referred to as “the father of ethics.” It was Plato who sought to establish an ethical system based on reason instead of religion (Cambridge Dictionary, n.d.).
In describing the focus of the Greek philosophers, Houser et al. (2006) wrote: Western ethical thinking began with Greek philosophers. Socrates (169 BC–399 BC) focused on the nature of the good life and how human beings ought to live; Plato (427 BC–347 BC) questioned the standard for goodness; and Aristotle (384 BC–322 BC) sought to define the good life and the means for attaining happiness. (p. 11)
Although the Greek philosophers lived many years ago, their beliefs remain as central tenets influencing moral principles, ethics, and ethical codes.
Moral Principles
Moral principles serve as the foundation for ethical codes including the IAMFC Code of Ethics (2017) and the ACA Code of Ethics (2014). These codes incorporate the five moral principles described by Kitchener (1984). In the ACA Code of Ethics (2014) a sixth principle, veracity was added. The following six principles are listed in the preamble of the ACA Code of Ethics:
Autonomy, fostering the right to control the direction of one's life; Non-maleficence, avoiding actions that cause harm; Beneficence, working for the good of the individual and society by promoting mental health and well-being; Justice, treating individuals equitably and fostering fairness and equity; Fidelity, honoring commitments and keeping promises including fulfilling one's responsibilities of trust in professional relationships; Veracity, dealing truthfully with individuals with whom counselors come into professional conduct. (p. 3)
In essence, the moral principles integrate ethical principles into practice while simultaneously establishing expectations about ethical behaviors. Implicit in the definitions is the expectation that counselors are morally and legally expected to understand and incorporate the principles.
Ethics Defined
Ethics has been defined as a branch of philosophy focusing on moral principles that govern behavior (Beauchamp & Childress, 2001; Remley & Herlihy, 2020). Although morals, values, and ethics have been used interchangeably, these terms differ. Remley and Herlihy (2020) concluded that: The term moral is derived from the Latin word, mores, which means customs or norms. Although values are very similar to morals in that they serve as a guide to determining what is good or right behavior, we use the term values to apply more broadly to both the personal and professional functioning of counselors. Ethics is a discipline within philosophy that is concerned with human conduct and moral decision making. (pp. 3, 4)
Although morals, values, and ethics all focus on the right or wrong of actions, they must be viewed as separate, distinct terms with ethics being a reflection of the profession's collective values in moral principles (Francis & Dugger, 2014). While there is not a single, absolute definition of ethics, researchers have defined ethics as doing what is right. Similarities exist in the various definitions of ethics listed below.
Cottone et al. (2021) defined ethics as “ethics in philosophy generally refers to theories about what is acceptable behavior” (p. 4). The authors also concluded that “professional ethics means that a practitioner is acting according to standards of practice defined as acceptable by the profession” (p. 5).
Wheeler and Bertram (2019) defined ethics as “ethical standards define professional behavior” (p. 6). In differentiating between virtue, aspirational, and mandatory ethics, Herlihy and Corey (2015) posited that “mandatory ethics describes a level of ethical functioning in which counselors act in compliance with minimal standards” (p. 8). In a later book, Corey (2016) distinguished mandatory, aspirational, and positive ethics. Further, Corey concluded that ethical codes are best used as guidelines for arriving at sound reasoning. In a similar vein, Corey et al. (2019) stressed the importance of ethics in the helping professions by stating “ethics pertains to the standards that govern the conduct of its professional members; law is the body of rules that govern the affairs of people within a community, state, or country” (p. 7).
In reviewing the above definitions, a common denominator exists. Namely, ethics focuses on doing what is right and avoiding wrong behaviors. These beliefs about behavior resulted in the formation of ethical codes.
Ethical Codes
Ethical codes are guidelines for right conduct and behavior. Regardless of how well codes are written, ethical codes are dependent on the moral character of counselors using the code. Ethical codes not only involve what the counselor should do, but they also involve what the counselor chooses to do (Sheperis et al., 2016). Given that most counselors conducting couple and family counseling are familiar with the IAMFC Code of Ethics (2017) and the ACA Code of Ethics (2014), this does not guarantee that they will always follow the code and do the right thing. Because counselors are human, they sometimes make mistakes and consequently do not do the “right” thing. Avoiding doing the right thing often results in an ethical trap.
While the counseling literature has an abundance of articles and books focusing on ethics, there is little information on ethical traps (Lebow & Frost, 2019; Mahaffey, 2012). This article is written to fill this gap and focus on four ethical traps as well as to provide ways to recognize, solve, and avoid the traps.
Ethical Traps
Steinman et al. (1998) identified four ethical traps. The authors posited that although most counselors want to engage in sound ethical behavior, no counselor is immune to error. Consequently, the authors sought to help counselors become more aware of ethical traps.
Ethical traps are similar to spider webs in that once the bug gets inside the web, it is difficult to get out. Similarly, once a counselor is involved in an ethical trap, it is difficult to get out of the trap. According to Sheperis et al. (2016), ethical traps consist of two decisions, a primary and a secondary decision. The primary decision precedes the secondary decision, and in reality, the primary decision leads to a secondary decision which is often broader and more intense. To illustrate this concept, this author will provide an example involving a family counselor who is counseling with a client (minor) referred by child protective services (CPS). During a counseling session, a client reported that her mother is using drugs again. The counselor is saddened to hear about the drug use. Further, the counselor questions whether she should report this information to CPS. After consideration, the counselor decided the reporting would hurt her relationship with the client, and perhaps the client was mistaken. In the end, the counselor did not report the information to CPS. Later, CPS learned that the mother was using drugs, and a hearing was scheduled. The counselor was requested to attend the hearing. Thus, the counselor experienced an ethical trap based on her primary decision of not reporting to CPS. Next, the counselor questioned how to solve the situation. Specifically, she questioned if she should tell the truth and admit that she ignored the client's statement, or should she remain quiet about the client's statement? The initial decision of not reporting to CPS was a pivotal deciding moment when the counselor should have followed sound ethical principles and contacted CPS. That primary decision led to the secondary decision that the counselor is currently experiencing. Essentially, the counselor is in an ethical trap from which it will be difficult for her to escape. The ethical trap resulted from the counselor's primary decision to disregard an ethical principle. Further, the counselor ignored sections of the IAMFC and ACA Codes of Ethics. In addition, the counselor ignored an ethical and legal principle to protect minors.
Four Ethical Traps
Sheperis et al. (2016) identified four ethical traps of which counselors should be aware. The four ethical traps are:
Ethical trap 1—the commonsense objectivity trap; Ethical trap 2—the values trap; Ethical trap 3—the circumstantiality trap; Ethical trap 4—the benefit trap.
In the following paragraphs, this author will describe the salient characteristics of each of the four traps. Following the description of the traps, the reader will be presented with four case studies. The cases will allow the couple and family counselor to check their understanding of ethical traps. Namely, the reader will have the opportunity to identify the case as representing the commonsense, values, circumstantiality, or benefit trap. Following the identification of the trap, the counselor is encouraged to think of ways that would have been helpful in avoiding the trap. At the end of the ethical trap descriptions, answers are provided for each of the four case studies.
The Commonsense Objectivity Trap
This ethical trap is based on the theme that if it makes sense, then it is the right decision. Essentially, the counselor considers the ethical situation by applying common sense objectivity, and then assumes if it seems right, then it is right. Sheperis et al. (2016) cautions “the reality is that objectivity is rarely possible in ethical decisions. If we believe we are truly objective, we are probably diluting ourselves!” (p. 18).
The Values Trap
This ethical trap is based on the counselor's personal values. Counselors are taught to follow the values prescribed by the profession instead of imposing their own values. When decisions are made because of the counselor's values, it is possible that the decision violates ethical codes, and in some instances, it violates laws.
The Circumstantiality Trap
This ethical trap is based on the circumstances surrounding the ethics trap. Specifically, the counselor, despite having substantial information, cannot make a decision regarding whether the dilemma is right or wrong. In this situation, the counselor keeps asking for additional information, and although the information is presented, the counselor cannot make a decision and concludes it depends on the circumstances.
The Benefit Trap
This ethical trap is called the benefit trap. In this trap, there is a winner and a loser. In describing this trap, Sheperis et al. (2016) wrote that “as counselors, we may find ourselves taking sides and joining forces for and against the parties involved. As we consider the dilemma, we must not get caught up in the winner and losers” (p. 19).
The above descriptions provided a brief illustration of the four ethical traps. In the next section, four case studies are provided. For each case, the reader is encouraged to:
Identify (name) the ethical trap depicted in the case. Identify the primary and secondary decision. Identify how the ethical trap might be solved. Identify how the ethical trap might have been prevented.
Case Studies
The Case of Martina and Mario (Fictitious Case)
Sharon has a private practice in which she specializes in couple and family counseling. Sharon is counseling with Martina and Mario regarding marital issues. It seems that Martina has been unable to become pregnant. In counseling, Martina and Mario discuss how much they want children, and consequently they have decided to pursue international adoption. Sharon does not think adoption is a good option. In counseling, Sharon increasingly focuses on the negative aspects of adoption and ignores the positive aspects. Sharon is so convincing that Martina and Mario begin to become very confused and unsure about adoption. With the consent of the couple, Sharon asked a friend to call them and tell them about her failed adoption.
Using the case of Martina and Mario, please respond to the four questions listed below.
Identify (name) the ethical trap depicted in the case. Identify the primary and secondary decision. Identify how the ethical trap might be solved. Identify how the ethical trap might have been prevented.
The Case of Jane and Joseph (Fictitious Case)
John is seeing Jane and Joseph for family counseling. For the past year, Jane and Joseph have told John that they do not get along, and in fact, they argue frequently. The couple said they feel guilty because their arguments are a negative influence on their two sons. Jane and Joseph asked the counselor if their sons should be included in their counseling session or if their sons should be seen by another counselor? John listens carefully but does not offer any direction. In obvious frustration, Jane and Joseph again inquire if their sons should be seen by a counselor. John replies, “perhaps, but I can’t say because I need more information.” John suggests the couple compile a list of behaviors for the next 6 months as John believes he cannot answer that question until he obtains more information.
Using the case of Jane and Joseph, please respond to the following four questions
Identify (name) the ethical trap depicted in the case. Identify the primary and secondary decision. Identify how the ethical trap might be solved. Identify how the ethical trap might have been prevented.
The Case of Roberto (Fictitious Case)
Maria works in the evenings as a couple and family counselor in private practice, and during the day, she works as a school counselor. In her role as middle school counselor, she sees Roberto for counseling. Because Roberto's math grades have recently decreased from A to C, Roberto's parents asked that he be seen by the school counselor. Roberto tells Maria that following his grandfather's death from COVID-19, 3 months ago, he has lost interest in academics, sports, and special activities. As Maria considers Roberto's situation, she decides that it seems normal and makes sense for Roberto to be sad and avoid participating in activities. Further, she reasons Roberto is still eating, sleeping, and playing some basketball. Since Roberto's situation seems okay, then it must be okay.
Using the case of Roberto, please respond to the four questions listed below:
Identify (name) the ethical trap depicted in the case. Identify the primary and secondary decision. Identify how the ethical trap might be solved. Identify how the ethical trap might have been prevented.
The Case of Charles and Clara (Fictitious Case)
Susan is a family counselor employed in a large counseling agency. Susan is seeing Charles and Clara for family counseling. They state that although they have been married for 20 years, they are not happily married. Following 6 months of counseling, they tell Susan that while they like her as a person, they do not think they are making progress in counseling. Privately, Susan agrees that the couple is making little progress. During their next counseling session, Charles and Clara tell Susan that they have decided to see another counselor, Elizabeth. Susan is hurt and upset that they are going to see Elizabeth for counseling. Susan also realizes that financially she does not need to lose clients. In desperation, Susan says she has heard Elizabeth is not a good counselor.
Using the case of Charles and Clara, please respond to the four questions listed below:
Identify (name) the ethical trap depicted in the case. Identify the primary and secondary decision. Identify how the ethical trap might be solved. Identify how the ethical trap might have been prevented.
Answers for Case Studies
The answers for the four ethical traps are listed below:
Martina and Mario—values trap Jane and Joseph—circumstantiality trap Roberto—commonsense objectivity trap Charles and Clara—benefit trap
Rationalizations
Sheperis et al. (2016) concluded that rationalizations may alter the counselor's thinking. The authors concluded the following statements (rationalizations) may increase the likelihood of an ethics trap. Further, the authors posited that counselors should be aware of the following thoughts:
If it's necessary, its ethical. If its legal and permissible, its proper. It's just part of the job. It's all for a good cause. I was just doing it for you. I am just lighting fire with fire. It doesn’t hurt anyone. Everyone's doing it. It is okay if I don’t gain personally. I’ve got it coming. I can be objective. (p.20)
Conclusions
The concept of ethics and ethical issues is not new. In fact, ethics dates back several centuries to the Greek philosophers including Plato, Socrates, and Aristotle. In fact, Plato is considered the “father of ethics.” Ethics is a frequent topic in counseling literature, and in its simplest most basic form, ethics involves doing what is right and avoiding wrong behavior.
Although ethics is a prevalent concept in counseling books and journals, much of the work on ethics involves ethical codes, ethical decision making, ethical dilemmas, legal issues, and moral principles. In contrast, although ethical traps result from disregarding ethical principles, the counseling literature is sparse on ethical traps (Lebow & Frost, 2019; Mahaffey, 2012). This article alerted counselors to be aware of ethical traps. Four ethical traps were discussed to help counselors to not only be aware of ethical traps but in addition to be aware of how to avoid ethical traps. The author concluded that avoiding ethical traps is not simple, and couple and family counselors must be aware of and knowledgeable about ethical traps in order to avoid them in their practice.
Being a professional counselor means that the couple and family counselor must follow ethical codes (e.g. IAMFC and ACA). Further, the counselor must be cognizant that ethical traps exist; however, awareness is not enough because counselors must be able to recognize and avoid ethical traps, and if ethical traps occur, the couple and family counselor must also understand how to solve the ethical trap. In addition, the counselor must be attentive to multicultural sensitivity and social justice issues in counseling clients. For example, the counselor must be very familiar with the ACA Multicultural and Social Justice Counseling Competencies (Ratts et al., 2015), and the ACA Advocacy Competencies (Toporek & Daniels, 2018). Clearly, the importance of the ACA Multicultural and Social Justice Counseling Competencies and the ACA Advocacy Competencies cannot be ignored or underestimated.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
