Psychology

IResearchNet

Psychology > Forensic Psychology > Forensic Psychology Ethics

Forensic Psychology Ethics




Forensic psychology, at the intersection of psychology and the legal system, raises complex ethical considerations that practitioners must navigate diligently. This article explores the ethical principles and challenges that define the practice of forensic psychology. It delves into the responsibilities of forensic psychologists, the ethical dilemmas they may encounter, and the guidelines and codes of conduct that govern their professional conduct.

Responsibilities of Forensic Psychologists

  1. Impartiality and Neutrality: Forensic psychologists have a fundamental duty to remain impartial and neutral when conducting assessments or offering expert opinions in legal cases. They must refrain from advocating for either side and strive to present unbiased, evidence-based findings.
  2. Informed Consent: Obtaining informed consent is crucial in forensic assessments. Psychologists must ensure that individuals understand the purpose, procedures, and potential consequences of their involvement. In certain cases, such as court-ordered evaluations, informed consent may not be required, but psychologists must still clarify the nature and limits of their role.
  3. Confidentiality: Forensic psychologists must strike a balance between confidentiality and the duty to report. They should clearly communicate the limits of confidentiality to clients, informing them when information may be shared with legal authorities, as mandated by the law.

Ethical Challenges in Forensic Psychology

  1. Multiple Roles: Forensic psychologists often wear several hats, such as evaluator, therapist, or consultant. Balancing these roles while maintaining objectivity can be ethically challenging. Psychologists must clarify their role and any potential conflicts of interest.
  2. Cultural Competence: Ensuring cultural competence when working with diverse populations is essential. Cultural biases and stereotypes can affect assessments, making it crucial for psychologists to address these biases and provide culturally sensitive evaluations.
  3. Risk Assessment: Conducting risk assessments, especially in cases involving potential harm to others, requires careful consideration of ethical principles. Psychologists must assess the risk while respecting the client’s rights and confidentiality.
  4. Testifying in Court: When testifying as expert witnesses, forensic psychologists must present their findings accurately and avoid overstepping their expertise. They should refrain from making legal determinations and focus on conveying psychological insights.

Professional Guidelines and Codes of Conduct

  1. American Psychological Association (APA) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct: Forensic psychologists in the United States are guided by the APA’s ethical principles, which provide a comprehensive framework for ethical decision-making. These principles emphasize integrity, competence, and respect for individuals’ rights and dignity.
  2. Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists: Developed by the American Psychology-Law Society, these guidelines address the specific ethical challenges encountered in forensic practice. They provide guidance on issues like competence, objectivity, and protecting the best interests of the justice system.

Professions greatly benefit from the establishment of a comprehensive code of ethics, consisting of principles and standards that guide their practitioners’ conduct. Such a code serves as an essential compass, offering moral guidance in navigating complex and uncertain situations. It not only elevates the profession’s reputation but also instills pride in adhering to shared values and competencies among colleagues, reinforcing their professional identity. Additionally, for the public, an ethics code plays a crucial role in fostering trust in the profession, setting expectations for practitioners’ behavior, and ensuring their well-being by deterring unethical conduct.




Unethical behavior, whether intentional or inadvertent, carries significant consequences for professionals. Even in the absence of criminal law violations that could lead to fines or incarceration, misconduct that comes under the scrutiny of an ethics committee or state board of psychology can result in reprimands, expulsion from professional societies, or the suspension or revocation of a license to practice. Such penalties can hinder practitioners from obtaining liability insurance, inclusion in directories and insurance panels, and, notably for forensic psychologists, maintaining credibility as expert witnesses whose integrity remains unimpeachable in the courtroom.

Forensic Psychology EthicsEthics codes, along with the committees and boards responsible for their enforcement, not only serve as a means of imposing penalties for violations but also offer valuable support when psychologists encounter unreasonable expectations or demands. To illustrate, consider a case in which a patient raised concerns about her therapist assigning her reading material, perceiving it as abandonment and inadequate care. An ethics committee addressed this complaint by informing the patient that bibliotherapy was a legitimate and acceptable therapeutic approach to complement her sessions, effectively resolving the issue without further pursuit.

Occasionally, unreasonable or intrusive demands may originate from supervisors, employers, or organizations. For instance, a prison psychologist faced a situation where he was instructed to serve on disciplinary committees that were responsible for determining punishments for his own patients. By invoking his ethical obligation to avoid problematic multiple relationships and conflicts of interest, as outlined in this section, the psychologist successfully clarified the impropriety of his involvement and was excused from such duties.

In the realm of forensic practice, a recurring challenge involves the subpoena and discoverability of psychological testing protocols by the court. In these instances, psychologists can reference their ethical responsibility to “make reasonable efforts to maintain the security of test materials” (American Psychological Association [APA], 2002, Standard 9.1), along with copyright laws safeguarding published tests. This allows them to appeal to the court, advocating that any released information should have restricted circulation and consist of test data but not test forms.

To uphold ethical standards in forensic psychology, practitioners must acknowledge both the guiding and supportive elements of ethics codes and related guidelines and maintain professional conduct consistently. The primary document offering psychologists guidance on ethical behavior is the “Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct,” as established by the American Psychological Association (APA) in 2002 and updated in 2010a. Commonly referred to as the Ethics Code, this document encompasses a wide range of psychological practice, teaching, and research, while also having significant implications for forensic practice. It comprises five general principles and 10 specific standards. The general principles are considered “aspirational in nature” and aim to inspire psychologists to adhere to the highest ethical standards in their profession. The specific standards translate these aspirations into mandatory and enforceable rules of conduct that psychologists must adhere to.

Two other documents that offer guidance for practicing principled forensic psychology are the “Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology” and the “Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in Family Law Proceedings,” both modeled after the Ethics Code and endorsed by the APA (2010b, 2013). For psychologists involved in family law cases, two additional APA documents (2012a, 2012b, 2013) are of particular relevance: “Guidelines for the Practice of Parenting Coordination” and “Guidelines for Psychological Evaluation in Child Protection Matters.” Similar to the general principles in the Ethics Code, these forensic specialty, child custody, parenting coordination, and child protection guidelines are not legally binding rules but rather aspirational recommendations outlining various procedures to ensure the delivery of high-quality forensic services. Forensic practitioners should acquaint themselves with both the mandatory rules in the Ethics Code and the recommended procedures outlined in these guidelines.

This section provides an overview of the five general principles and 10 specific standards in the APA Ethics Code, emphasizing their implications for forensic practice and how they may be elaborated upon in the forensic specialty and child custody guidelines. Additionally, it discusses the importance of considering personal values and professional responsibility for forensic psychologists and concludes with recommendations to minimize vulnerability to ethical complaints and legal actions in forensic practice.

Ethics Code: General Principles

The APA Ethics Code’s section on general principles outlines five aspirational objectives that psychologists should endeavor to uphold in their practice, teaching, and research. These principles provide a foundational framework for ethical conduct in psychology and guide psychologists in their professional endeavors. Read more about Ethics Code: General Principles.

Ethics Code: Specific Standards

As mentioned earlier, the APA Ethics Code consists of 10 specific standards that function as binding rules of conduct, demanding psychologists’ adherence. These standards, unlike the aspirational general principles, lay out explicit requirements that psychologists must meet to maintain compliance with the Ethics Code. These standards encompass various aspects of practice, teaching, and research, with implications that vary in their specificity for those practicing principled forensic psychology. Nonetheless, it is essential to emphasize that forensic psychologists are first and foremost psychologists, and their forensic specialization comes second. Therefore, they bear the responsibility of ensuring that all their professional actions align with the Ethics Code’s principles and standards. In the following sections, we will delve into these specific standards and explore their implications for forensic psychology practice. Read more about Ethics Code: Specific Standards.

Values and Responsibility

Forensic psychologists frequently encounter two interconnected aspects of principled practice that require closer examination. The first pertains to the duty of practitioners to safeguard their professional conduct from the influence of their personal values. The second aspect involves the professional responsibility of forensic psychologists to withstand any expectations or requests made by attorneys, even if they are legally permissible, when such demands contradict the ethical principles and standards of psychology. In the subsequent sections, we will delve into these dimensions of ethical practice within the field of forensic psychology. Read more about Values and Responsibility.

Recommendations

Here are some key recommendations to encapsulate the fundamental principles of practicing ethical forensic psychology while reducing vulnerability to ethical complaints and legal actions:

  1. Adhere to the APA Ethics Code and pay particular attention to ethical principles and standards with direct relevance to forensic services. Familiarize yourself with the forensic specialty guidelines.
  2. Provide services that demonstrate a high level of competence acquired through ongoing education, training, and experience, ensuring that your expertise remains current.
  3. Possess a deep understanding of the terminology, concepts, practices, and standards common in the legal field. Stay informed about the regulations, statutes, and procedures relevant to your practice in the states where you are licensed or permitted to work.
  4. Maintain accurate and comprehensive records, securely store them, and retain them for the duration mandated by state requirements.
  5. Be cognizant of your roles as a forensic psychologist, which may differ from the expectations of attorneys and their clients. Avoid conflicts of interest and other situations that could compromise your ethical practice.
  6. When faced with unfamiliar situations or unexpected ethical dilemmas, seek consultation with a reputable colleague. Additionally, consider establishing consulting relationships with attorneys to gain insights into the legal aspects of forensic issues.

References:

  1. American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060-1073.
  2. American Psychological Association. (2007). Record keeping guidelines. American Psycholo­gist, 62, 993-1004.
  3. American Psychological Association. (2010a). 2010 amendments to the 2002 “Ethical Princi­ples of Psychologists and Code of Conduct.” American Psychologist, 65,
  4. American Psychological Association. (2010b). Guidelines for child custody evaluations in family law proceedings. American Psychologist, 65, 863-867.
  5. American Psychological Association. (2012a). Guidelines for the practice of parenting coordination. American Psychologist, 67, 63-71.
  6. American Psychological Association. (2012b). Guidelines for psychological evaluation in child protection matters. American Psychologist, 68, 20-31.
  7. American Psychological Association. (2013). Specialty guidelines for forensic psychology. American Psychologist, 68, 7-19.
  8. Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880 (1983).
  9. Barnett, J. C., Lazarus, A. A., Vasquez, M. T., Moorhead-Slaughter, O., & Johnson, B. (2007). Boundary issues and multiple relationships. Professional Psychology, 38,401-410.
  10. Bersoff, D. N. (Ed.). (2008). Ethical conflicts in psychology (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  11. Butcher, J. N. (2013). Computerized personality assessment. In J. R. Graham & J. A. Naglieri (Eds.), Clinical psychology (pp. 165-191). Volume 10 in I. B. Weiner (Ed.-in-Chief), Handbook of psychology (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
  12. Fisher, M. A. (2009). Replacing “Who is the client?” with a different ethical question. Professional Psychology, 40,1-7.
  13. Golding, S. L. (1990). Mental health professionals and the courts: The ethics of expertise. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 13, 281-307.
  14. Goodstein, L. D. (2012). The interstate delivery of psychological services: Opportunities and obstacles. Psychological Services, 9 (3), 231-239.
  15. Gorny, I., & Merten, T. (2007). Symptom information—warning—coaching: How do they affect successful feigning in neuropsychological assessment? Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 41, 71 -97.
  16. Greenberg, S. A., & Shuman, D. W. (2007). When worlds collide: Therapeutic and forensic roles. Professional Psychology, 38,129-132.
  17. Hess, A. K. (1998). Accepting forensic case referrals: Ethical and professional considerations. Professional Psychology, 29, 109-114.
  18. Jurek v. Texas, 428 U.S. 262 (1976).
  19. Kitchener, K. S., & Anderson, S. K. (2011). Foundations of ethical practice, research, and teaching in psychology (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
  20. Knapp, S. J., & VandeCreek, L. (2012). Practical ethics for psychologists: A positive approach (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  21. Koocher, G. P., & Keith-Spiegel, P. C. (2008). Ethics in psychology and the mental health professions: Standards and cases (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  22. McMinn, M. R., Bearse, J., Heyne, L. K., Smithberger, A., & Erb, A. L. (2011). Technology and independent practice: Survey findings and implications. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 42, 176-184.
  23. Monahan, J. (Ed.). (1980). Who is the client? Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  24. Monahan, J., & Steadman, H. J. (1996). Violent storms and violent people: How meteorology can inform risk communication in mental health law. American Psychologist, 51, 931-938.
  25. Shuman, D. W., & Greenberg, S. (1998). The role of ethical norms in the admissibility of expert testimony. The Judges’ Journal: A Quarterly of the Judicial Division, 37, 4-43.
  26. Springman, R. E., & Vandenberg, B. R. (2009). The effects of test-strategy coaching on measures of competency to stand trial. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 9, 179-196.
  27. Strasburger, L. H., Gutheil, T. G., & Brodsky, S. L. (1997). On wearing two hats: Role conflict in serving as both psychotherapist and expert witness. American Journal of Psychiatry, 154, 448-456.
  28. Suhr, J. A., & Gunstad, J. (2007). Coaching and malingering: A review. In G. J. Larrabee (Ed.), Assessment of malingered neuropsychological deficits (pp. 287-311). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  29. Victor, T. L., & Abeles, N. (2004). Coaching clients to take psychological and neuropsychological tests: A clash of ethical obligations. Professional Psychology, 35,373-379.
  30. Weiner, I. B. (1989). On competence and ethicality in psychodiagnostic assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 53, 827-831.
  31. Weiner, I. B., & Bornstein, R. F. (2009). Principles of psychotherapy (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
  32. Weiner, I. B., & Greene, R. L. (2008). Handbook of personality assessment. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.