The OP Review November 2005 - Ohio Psychological Association

An Ethical Dilemma
By Mary Ann Orcutt, PhD, OPA Ethics Committee Member
Below is a real-life situation that a psychologist has found
him/herself in. What would you do Judge for yourself what
parts are ethical/unethical, and whether the psychology law
allowed for his/her behavior before reading ahead.
A psychologist treats a man and his 3-year-old son in
assisting the son to cope with the mother’s mental illness,
dealing with the son’s general
adjustment to their visitation and
promoting a relationship between the
mother and her son. The father is the
residential parent, although the mother
also has full parental rights.
Treatment of the son and the father
continues for one year, including some
contact with the paternal grandmother.
The parents are embroiled in a
domestic relations dispute over
custody and visitation. The
psychologist develops suspicions that
the child is at risk of abuse, including
possible sexual abuse, while under the
care of the mother and the mother’s family.
1) The psychologist faxes a statement to county family
services relating suspicions, such as the risk of possible
abuse, and by whom.
2) The psychologist, two months later, faxes another statement
to the same agency restating concerns about the welfare of
the child when in the custody of the mother and her family.
3) Six months later, the psychologist faxes a third statement to
the same agency stating she has continued concerns about
the son, and that the child has made statements that have
alarmed the psychologist.
4) The first two letters also were faxed to the father and the
father’s attorney. The psychologist knew that there was
pending litigation relative to parental visitation/custody.
5) The psychologist testified as a treating psychologist that
visitation between the child and the mother should be under
supervision.
What is ethical/unethical, legal, illegal regarding what the
psychologist did
Numbers 1-3 are appropriate, ethical, legal and necessary,
as it was reporting suspected abuse to the proper authorities
in the county.
Number 4 blurred the psychologist’s role between being a
treating psychologist and being a forensic evaluator providing
visitation recommendations to the father’s attorney, and was
therefore unethical and illegal in Ohio.
Number 5: Formal testimony was given without sufficient
information about the mother or the residents in her home.
The psychologist based the opinion only on observations
of the child and interviews with paternal family members.
The psychologist had never met the mother or any member
of her household. The formal testimony reflected a lack of
fundamental or reasonable level of knowledge and
understanding of the legal and professional standards of
care that govern the participation
of psychological experts in
legal proceedings. Unethical
and illegal under psychology
law in Ohio.
So what happened
This case was reported to the
State Board of Psychology.
The psychologist was found to be
in violation of: 1) being negligent
in the practice of psychology, as the
psychologists’ professional practice
clearly fell below the standards of
acceptable practice, and hurt the
welfare of the client, and 2) practicing in an area of psychology
for which the person is clearly untrained or incompetent. The
psychologist did not limit him/herself to the specialty areas in
which s/he had specific training and competence.
In addition, the psychologist was issued a reprimand by
the State Board. The psychologist had to take additional
continuing education regarding psychological services to
family and children in the context of parenting, visitation
and custody, which was over and above the required amount
to maintain a license.
The consent agreement with the Board is a public record, and
the following people received written notice of the reprimand:
1) the Association of State and Provincial Psychology
Boards (ASPPB)
2) Ohio licensees receiving any newsletter issued by
the Board
3) individuals/organizations who have requested formal
notification of Board actions
4) the Healthcare Integrity Protection Data Bank
5) the psychologist’s social security number is released
to the ASPPB Disciplinary Data Bank and other
organizations that are legally required to request it
for tracking and monitoring purposes.
All of the notification in the last bullet point can be
extremely damaging if one wishes to stay on managed care
panels, hospital staffs, transfer one’s license from one state to
another and obtain future malpractice insurance, thus that is
most painful part of the reprimand.
JUNE 2005 8