Ethics for Whom?

Janet Matthews's review of the two-volume APA Handbook of Ethics in Psychology raised two concerns for me regarding educating all psychologists in the full range of ethical issues. My first concern is "a tendency to focus on those parts of the code that are specifically relevant to one's major activities without viewing the code in its entirety." For several years I taught an ethics course for graduate students in I/O and experimental psychology. Topics included competency, dual relationships, and other issues typically of primary concern to clinicians. We had guest teachers familiar with state licensing and clinicians' struggle to gain prescription privileges. The general idea was that all psychologists are responsible for the ethics of every psychologist. I wonder how many graduate programs share that idea.

My second concern is that the cost of these volumes will limit their use by and impact on students. Matthews believes they are worth the $395 price. Certainly large libraries will buy the set as will most departments, although probably mainly those with accredited professional programs. However, these hefty volumes are out of the price range of the many departments and libraries whose budgets have been cut or were not large to begin with. None but the wealthiest (1%?) graduate students will even consider a purchase. This will be another money-maker for APA Publications, but I doubt that the majority of psychologists (99%?) will see these books.

Read the Review

Ethics 101: Philosophical Foundations to Practical Applications
By Janet R. Matthews
      PsycCRITIQUES, 2012 Vol 57(2)

Comments

[Mitchell M. Handelsman]

I was happy to read both Janet Matthews’s review of the APA Handbook of Ethics in Psychology (of which I am honored to be an associate editor) and James Korn’s comment. Matthews and Korn seem to agree that the book is so valuable as a reference on ethics in psychology that it’s a shame that some people, including many graduate students, may not be able to afford it. Just like textbooks, tuition, journals, and computers, finances often prevent access to potentially useful resources. At the extreme, of course, is the possibility that educational works can be made available to anybody who can afford a computer or make it to a library (or internet café) by having authors work for free and post their work online—rather than in books and journals for which people have to pay. Indeed, some universities are starting to offer free courses online.

Matthews was correct that the book was not designed to be a textbook; rather, we wanted it to be a reference work. As Sam Knapp stated in the introduction: "It is intended for practitioners, researchers, academic psychologists, and graduate students who seek a comprehensive review of a particular area of psychology." Also unlike many ethics texts, we wanted to make a new and positive contribution rather than only summarizing the literature. It appears we’ve succeeded; as Matthews said, “It provides a somewhat different approach to the available ethics literature.”

Korn makes the excellent point that a comprehensive range of ethics issues and topics should be taught to all aspiring psychologists, no matter what their specialty. I agree, and I hope that our book will be one resource for faculty preparing to teach such courses, as well as for graduate students who can make it to a library.

[Janet R. Matthews, Ph.D., ABPP]

I appreciate both Jim and Mitch making comments about my review. Working with undergraduates, I find that often they only hear about segments of the code rather than the code in its entirety. With that foundation once they reach graduate school, they again "wear blinders" as I saw when giving oral exams for licensure. That background was the basis for my comments - I applaud Jim for his work to combat this problem. Also, I agree with Jim about the cost of the book but my hope was that a sufficient number of department's would buy this book so that it could be more readily accessible than the "coffee table" price might suggest. Failing that option, at least perhaps libraries could acquire it.