Understanding of decision-making and learning environments

at
Categories
Tags

 

 

Consider the following questions when you reply to your peers:

What suggestions do your peers make that are well supported?
Does your peer’s explanation provide a complete and elaborate understanding of decision-making and learning environments?
What clarifications would you recommend?
As the expert, does your peer address the potential problems that you personally might face as a “new recruit”?
What suggestions do you recommend?

Mallory wrote,
Scenario: You are a school counselor at a rural high school. You have been counseling a student, and he confided in you that one of his friends has recently engaged in sexual relations with one of the teacher’s daughters. (She is a friend of yours.) He does not divulge the name of the other student and refuses to talk any further about the issue.

What ethical considerations must be considered in this situation?

The ethical consideration would be confidentiality and the counselor would continue to keep the conversation private unless it rises to a legal level (American School Counselor Association, 2016) (harm, dependent on the student). The act of sex does not rise to the level of legal harm in this case, therefore, the counselor should keep the conversation at bay, even though it is her friend’s daughter. Another consideration would be there is no actual evidence of this happening, just the student’s word, which at this point would be a rumor.

How does confidentiality affect your considerations and actions?

This situation is difficult as a counselor, as friend, and as a parent (although it does not say I am a parent in the scenario, it is still a consideration that comes to my mind). Although as a friend and parent I would possibly want to tell those things to my friend or be told that about my daughter, my ethical duties prevent me from doing so. As a school counselor I must abide by the ethical standards of my career choice.

What options might you have to address the situation?

I would use the 7-step guide to decision making, state the problem, check the facts, identify relevant factors, develop a list of options, test the options, make a choice, and review steps 1-6 (The Geological Society of America, 2022). I would try to get the student to open up more about the situation. It obviously made them feel a certain way because they felt the need to speak on it to the school counselor. Once I can understand the problem better, I can move on to finding out the facts, and so on. My main focus is to understand why the student felt the need to tell me and determine if there is any type of harmful actives that happen during or came from this, if it is a true statement.

Ethically, since this is hearsay, are you legally obligated to address?

Because the information is not at a level of harm or legal standard, I am not legally obligated to address anything. However, the student felt the need to bring it to my attention, and my focus and goal is to understand why they felt that way. He could be telling the truth with firsthand knowledge, heard it from someone, or became jealous of the other two individuals and felt as if the attention needed to be on him. There are many different ways this can go.

Using appropriate citations and references, explain how the empirical research, theoretical models, and ethical standards presented in the assigned resources suggest the importance of applying ethical decision-making strategies to scenarios such as these.

The earlier the intervention, the greater chance major situations are eliminated from happening (Carlson, 2017). To be able to get to that early intervention, the counselors must create a trust with the students, to allow the students to feel comfortable with coming to the counselor as soon as they can. Carlson (2017) also goes on to state that, “Trust can take weeks or even months to build, but it can be shattered in a moment — and possibly forever.” (Para. 2). There are many other reasons to back this up, but this is where it starts and using the decision-making strategies for each incitement allows the counselor to follow a guide that is intended to keep the children safe, and also allows for evidence and questioning to be asked again and again to determine if the answer is the same. This is there for the rising of the situation to legal action or a conversation with a parent. For example, what if I went to my friend as soon as the student told me, without working the steps to decision-making guide, only to have her cause panic and hurt feelings, then come to find out the student lied and was mad or jealous of the two he claimed had sex. There is not reason to get to that level without having the understanding and evidence of the situation first, which the guide provides.

Adelita wrote,

What ethical considerations must be considered in this situation?
The ethical consideration must be confidentiality to the student who divulges the information. In certain circumstances, no one is hurting. It is hearsay, and nothing is concrete yet.

How does confidentiality affect your considerations and actions?
As any parent, I know confidentiality and my actions are essential. If my child is sexually active, this may cloud my thinking and flood my judgment. I would want to know who this person is in question and in a relationship with my child, how old he is, he is even a student currently at the school my child attends. Children are children until they become adults. Was this consensual, or is she being pushed to engage in this sexual relationship? Is this a way to get back at the boy or get my child in trouble? There are several variables to consider. Do I proceed to want to know more, or will I jeopardize my standing with this information as a school counselor?

Confidentiality will affect considerations and actions, but a school counselor protects and safeguards the information entrusted. My responsibility is to support all students and their development by actively working to eliminate systemic barriers or biases impeding student development. A.1. Supporting Student Development (e) (ASCA Ethical Standards for School Counselors, 2016).

What options might you have to address the situation?
I want to ask my friend about safe sex with her daughter and, if not, to consider how she reacts to discussing the topic with her child and to talk about it candidly and openly to her child about it. Safeguards in having sex and unprotected sex and measures of diseases, unwanted pregnancy, and STDs.

Ethically, since this is hearsay, are you legally obligated to address?
You are not legally obligated to address this concern as a school counselor. As a counselor, you should gather as much information as possible that will illuminate the fears. It is essential to be as specific and objective as you can. You are writing ideas out with any facts, separating innuendos, assumptions, hypotheses, or suspicions.

Using appropriate citations and references, explain how the empirical research, theoretical models, and ethical standards presented in the assigned resources suggest the importance of applying ethical decision-making strategies to scenarios such as these.
ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING
When faced with an ethical dilemma, school counselors and school counseling program directors/supervisors use an ethical decision-making model. (ASCA Ethical Standards for School Counselors, 2016). (a) Apply the ethical principles of: Beneficence: working for the good of the individual and society by promoting mental health and well-being; Autonomy: fostering the right to control the direction of one’s life; Nonmaleficence: avoiding actions that cause harm Justice: treating individuals equitably and fostering fairness and equality; Fidelity: honoring commitments and keeping promises, including fulfilling one’s responsibilities of trust in professional relationships; Veracity: dealing truthfully with individuals with whom school counselors come into professional contact (ASCA Ethical Standards for School Counselors, 2016). (g) In this case, no one is hurt, and it could be gossip. Is the girl at a legal age, or is the boy at a legal age as well, was it a consensual relationship?

Sample Solution

ority is given to him. This is further supported by Aristotle’s Politics ((1996), Page 28): ‘a king is the natural superior of his subjects.’ However, he does later emphasise to put all faith in the prince is wrong and has consequences; a thorough examination of the cause of war is required along with the willingness to negotiate rival party (Begby et al (2006b), Page 312& 318). This is supported by the actions of Hitler are deemed unjustly. Also, in today’s world, wars are no longer fought only by states but also non-state actors like Al-Queda and ISIS, showing Vittola’s normative claim on authority is outdated. This is further supported by Frowe’s claim that the leader needs to represent the people’s interests, under legitimate authority, which links on to the fourth condition: Public declaration of war. Agreed with many, there must be an official announcement on a declaration of war (Frowe (2011), Page 59-60&63).
Finally, the most controversial condition is that wars should have a reasonable chance of success. As Vittola reiterated, the aim of war is to establish peace and security; securing the public good. If this can’t be achieved, Frowe argues it would be better to surrender to the enemy. This can be justified because the costs of war would have been bigger (Frowe (2011), Page 56-7).
Consequently, jus ad bellum comprises several conditions but most importantly: just cause and proportionality. This gives people a guide whether it’s lawful to enter a war or not. However, this is only one part of the theory of the just war. Nevertheless, it can be seen above that jus ad bellum can be debated throughout, showing that there is no definitive theory of a just war, as it is normatively theorised.

Jus in bello

The second section begins deciphering jus in bello or what actions can we classify as permissible in just wars (Begby et al (2006b), Page 323).
First, it is never just to intentionally kill innocent people in wars, supported by Vittola’s first proposition. This is widely accepted as ‘all people have a right not to be killed’ and if a soldier does, they have violated that right and lost their right. This is further supported by “non-combatant immunity” (Frowe (2011), Page 151), which leads to the question of combatant qualification mentioned later in the essay. This is corroborated by the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, ending the Second World War, where millions were intently killed, just to secure the aim of war. However, sometimes civilians are accidentally killed through wars to achieve their goal of peace and security. This is supported by Vittola, who implies proportionality again to justify action: ‘care must be taken where evil doesn’t outweigh the possible benefits (Begby et al (2006b), Page 325).’ This is further supported by Frowe who explains it is lawful to unintentionally kill, whenever the combatant has full knowledge of his actions and seeks to complete his aim, but it would come at a cost. However, this does not hide the fact the unintended still killed innocent people, showing immorality in their actions. Thus, it depends again on proportionality as Thomson argues (Frowe (2011), Page 141).
This leads to question of what qualifies to be a combatant, and whether it is lawful to kill each other as combatants. Combatants are people who are involved directly or indirectly with the war and it is lawful to kill ‘to shelter the innocent from harm…punish evildoers (Begby et al (2006b), Page 290).However, as mentioned above civilian cannot be harmed, showing combatants as the only legitimate targets, another condition of jus in bello, as ‘we may not use the sword against those who have not harmed us (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314).’ In addition, Frowe suggested combatants must be identified as combatants, to avoid

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.
Hi, how can I help?