Emily Adams

PSYCHOLOGY 682
School Psychology: Legal and Ethical Principles and
Preventive Service Delivery
FINAL EXAM

SHORT ANSWER: Summarize the codes or principles involved.

1. What are the general grounds and procedures for expelling students, and what are the criteria and
procedures involved in expulsion of a special needs student?

School principals may suspend students for 10 days or less as long as notice and the opportunity
to be heard are provided. Expulsion is excluding the student from school for a period of longer than 10
consecutive school days, and requires more formal due process and usually requires action by school
board. Students with disabilities have greater protections with regard to disciplinary removals. The
portions of IDEA that address disciplinary removals are complex.
A manifestation determination review is conducted to determine whether a childs disciplinary
infraction was caused by his or her disability and/or the schools failure to implements the childs IEP.
When the misconduct is a manifestation of a disability or the schools failure to implement the IEP, the
school is required to conduct a functional behavioral assessment and implement or revise the childs IEP.
When the conduct is not a manifestation of the disability or the schools failure to implement the IEP, the
school is required to conduct a functional behavioral assessment and implement or revise the childs IEP,
but the child may be placed in a different setting (e.g., suspension). The child with a disability under
IDEA must continue to receive special education. Schools may discontinue services to 504-only students
as long as nondisabled students receive the same treatment.

2. Under what circumstances may a minor consent to his her or own mental health treatment,
without parental involvement being required?

Emily Adams

PSYCHOLOGY 682
School Psychology: Legal and Ethical Principles and
Preventive Service Delivery
FINAL EXAM
In emergency or urgent situations it is permissible for School psychologists to provide emergency
assistance without parent consent.
Minors who seek assistance on their own/self-referrals: School districts should adopt written
policies states that students may be seen by the School psychologist or other mental health prof without
parent notice or consent at least once to ensure the student is not in danger (e.g. child abuse, suicide) or if
it is suspected the student may be in danger to others. This is also to establish the nature and degree of the
need for services and assure the child is safe and not in danger. It is ethically permissible to provide
services to mature minors without parent consent where allowed by state law and school district policy.

3. What is your ethical obligation in establishing your relationship with a student you are going to
assess? Briefly describe what you might say (and perhaps ask) in doing so and how that vary by
developmental and cognitive level.

It is ethically permissible to assess a minor child without his or her explicit assent if the
assessment promises to benefit his/her welfare. Consistent with good testing practices, practitioners need
to make full use of their professional skills to gain the active cooperation of the student.
Every student has the right to be fully informed about the scope and nature of the assessment
process, whether or not the student is given a choice to assent to or refuse services. Practitioners are
obligated ethically to explain the assessment process to the pupil in a manner that is understood by the
student. This explanation includes how the assessment results will be used, who will receive information,
and possible implications of results. Even preschoolers and children who are developmentally disabled
should receive an explanation in a language the can understand as to why they are being seen by the
school psychologist.

Emily Adams

PSYCHOLOGY 682
School Psychology: Legal and Ethical Principles and
Preventive Service Delivery
FINAL EXAM
It is also important to build a rapport with the student prior to test administration. This may be
done by asking questions/having conversations regarding the childs likes/dislikes, hobbies, friends, etc.
This is to increase the comfort of the child and begin to build a trusting and safe environment.

4. What are the laws relevant to the use of physical restraint, force, or punishment of students in
California?

The Hughes Bill in 1990 prohibited the use of aversive behavior interventions and mandated the
development and implementation of positive behavior intervention plans for special education students
with serious behavior problems. Prior to enactment of the Hughes Bill, there were few, if any, California
laws or regulations addressing the use of behavioral interventions for special education students with
behavioral difficulties or providing schools with guidance regarding how to handle students whose
behavior disrupted the learning environment. Many schools reportedly relied on punishment, school
exclusion, and the use of aversive behavioral interventions to address problem student behavior that
interfered with classroom instruction.
Corporal punishment is generally defined as the infliction of pain on the body as a penalty for
conduct disapproved by the punisher. This includes spanking, beating, whipping, gagging, punching,
shoving, knuckle rapping, arm twisting, shaking, and ear a hair pulling. Corporal punishment in the
schools can be psychologically harmful to children and alternative approaches to maintaining school
discipline are preferable and more effective. The role of the school psychologist should be amongst
school personnel to promote alternatives.
Corporal punishment is illegal in California. It is considered unethical and can lead to permanent
psychological and physical damage to the child. By using aversive behavior interventions, you are not
teaching adaptive behaviors (how to behave appropriately). When teachers and staff respond to problem

Emily Adams

PSYCHOLOGY 682
School Psychology: Legal and Ethical Principles and
Preventive Service Delivery
FINAL EXAM
behavior with restraint and seclusion, students do not learn meaningful alternative ways of
communicating and interacting. Punitive methods of addressing behavioral problems also create an
aversive environment counterproductive to facilitating learning.
However, according to the Hughes Bill, when a student demonstrates unpredictable, spontaneous
behavior which poses clear and present danger of serious physical harm to the student or others and which
cannot be immediately prevented by a response less restrictive than the temporary application of a
technique used to control the behavior, emergency interventions may be used to control the dangerous
behavior.
These emergency interventions must only be used after other interventions have not been
successful in the past. The emergency interventions must NOT include seclusion behind a locked door;
immobilization of all four extremities; unnecessary or unreasonable force, cause physical pain; use of
toxic or unpleasant sprays to the students face; denial of food, water, shelter, bedding, or access to
bathroom; use of verbal abuse or humiliation; or derivation of and of the students senses.
In California school districts, positive methods of changing challenging behavior are the primary
focus of any behavior plan and that restraints are never provided for any purpose other than to meet the
immediate and imminent safety of the student or others in the educational environment.

5. In light of legal requirements and relevant ethical considerations, what will be role as a school
psychologist regarding the possibility of a suicidal student? 174-178,

School districts should have student suicide prevention policies and procedures, and ensure staff
orientation to district policy. Staff should follow procedures outlines in safe school plan. Student should
be seen for assessment of lethality of suicide ideation by trained staff. A do no harm contract does not
substitute for careful risk assessment and appropriate intervention based on risk.

Emily Adams

PSYCHOLOGY 682
School Psychology: Legal and Ethical Principles and
Preventive Service Delivery
FINAL EXAM
Professionals involved in assessment of suicide risk should have verifiable training and consult
with others as appropriate. Experts recommend that risk assessment include both structured and
unstructured methods. Interview methods of assessing lethality generally involve seeking answers to a
series of critical questions such as:
Is there a preoccupation with death?
Does the student have a suicide plan?
Has the student made previous suicide in the family?
Is the student involved with drugs?
Has there been a precipitating event?
Why does the student want to die?
Parents must be contacted in all cases, whether risk is determined to be low or high. The high
risk student should not be left alone and his or her parents should be required to come to school for a
conference and to pick up their child. The school psychologist needs to ensure that parents understand the
seriousness of the situation, and parents should be advised to increase supervision at home and remove
access to weapons. The practitioner should be prepared to refer the family to a community mental health
professional who has expertise in working with suicidal youth.

SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS ESSAYS: For each scenario, be sure to include 1) the relevant legal
principles and possible implications; 2) the possible ethical implications; 3) your probable actions, and/or
all considerations which would guide your actions.

6. The parents of a teenage girl whom you have been counseling come to your office and demand to
know whether their child has talked about being sexually active. She is, and has talked about it
with you. They also demand to see your file and cumulative record. What would your legal and

Emily Adams

PSYCHOLOGY 682
School Psychology: Legal and Ethical Principles and
Preventive Service Delivery
FINAL EXAM
ethical concerns be in terms of the daughters sexual activity, and in terms of the parents
requests?

According to Ethical Code Standard 4.01, Privacy and Confidentiality, school psychologists have
a primary obligation and take reasonable precautions to protect confidential information obtained through
or stored in any medium, recognizing that the extent and limits of confidentiality may be regulated by law
or established by institutional rules or professional or scientific relationship.
Standard I.2.4: Wherever feasible, student assent is obtained prior to disclosure of his or her
confidences to third parties, including disclosure to the students parents. According to this ethical code,
it is best to receive the students assent before disclosing any information to her parents, although it is not
a legal necessity. The relationship between the client and myself needs to remain honest and trustworthy,
and if the student feels I have betrayed her trust, she is more than likely to discontinue receiving
counseling services from me.
Because a student who is a minor generally has no legal right to confidentiality independent of
the parents, it is critically important to discuss confidentiality and its limits with parents when seeking
consent to provide direct services to a minor. The practitioner must explain to the parents why a promise
of confidentiality to the child can be essential to an effective helping relationship and seek parent
understanding and agreement that the psychologist will not share with the parent specific confidences
disclosed by the child without the childs assent to do so.
If I truly believe that by telling the parents I am putting that childs safety at risk because the
parents reaction may harm the child, I will not disclose the information to the parents. I would consult
with the student regarding this matter to gain a better understanding of the parents motivations. If I
believe the student is able to engage in sexual behaviors responsibly and without putting her safety or

Emily Adams

PSYCHOLOGY 682
School Psychology: Legal and Ethical Principles and
Preventive Service Delivery
FINAL EXAM
anothers safety at risk, I would reassure the parents that had the student reported engaging in high-risk
behavior, I would share this (without specific confidences) information with the parent.
However, in accordance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), parents
have a right to inspect, review, and request amendments of the students educational records. Therefore,
they have a right to view the students cumulative record, but I will be cautious with my decision to break
confidentiality based on the situation.

7) You work in a public high school and have been providing counseling services to Tom, a 15 yearold male student, for half a year. Though Tom plays sports and is well-liked by the school faculty
and staff, he has stated you are the only adult he trusts. Six months ago, he was placed in a foster
home after getting into physical fight with his stepfather. He is not in special education, however,
a referral has been sent to the buildings pre-referral intervention team regarding Toms poor math
skills. He is currently flunking math, which is a graduation requirement and impacts his eligibility
to play sports. When Tom fails to qualify as a student with learning disabilities, Toms coach, is
livid. He contacts the mother and the principal to tell them to bring an advocate to the
multidisciplinary team and to ask for an external second evaluation.
The legal principles relevant to this case are Standard IV.2 and I.3.
Standard IV.2 Respect for Law and Relationship of Law and Ethics. School psychologists are
knowledgeable of and respect laws pertinent to the practice of school psychology. In choosing an
appropriate course of action, they consider the relationship between law and the Principles for
Professional Ethics.
Standard I.3 Fairness and Justice. School psychologists promote fairness and justice. They use
their expertise to cultivate school climates that are safe and welcoming to all persons regardless of actual

Emily Adams

PSYCHOLOGY 682
School Psychology: Legal and Ethical Principles and
Preventive Service Delivery
FINAL EXAM
or perceived characteristics, including race, ethnicity, color, religion, ancestry, national origin,
immigration status, SES, primary language, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender
expression, mental, physical, or sensory disability, or any other distinguishing characteristics.
This principle applies to this case specifically in Standard I.3.3 which states that school
psychologists work to correct school practices that are unjustly discriminatory or that deny students,
parents, or others their legal rights. They take steps to foster a school climate that is safe, accepting, and
respectful of all persons.
Standard I.3.4 also applies to this case because school psychologists strive to ensure that all
children have equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from school programs and that all students
and families have access to and can benefit from school psychological services.
In this scenario, Tom either truly is a student with learning disabilities and by not being identified
by the assessment, those results are invalid and he should be reassessed, or Tom truly does not have a
learning disability. It is the school psychologist who needs to find the answer to this dilemma. If the
school psychologist suspects that this student is being treated unjustly, he/she has the responsibility to
make the adjustments necessary to rectify the situation in the best interest of the child. There is the
possibility that Toms coach does not want Tom to fail math because it effects Toms eligibility to play
sports, which may be a valid concern because Toms home life sounds unstable at the moment and being
on a team may facilitate growth for him.
However, regardless of whether he qualifies for special education services, some type of
intervention should be set up to support Tom to improve his math skills so he will be able to graduate and
continue being on the team.

8) You are a school psychologist in a small rural district. Suppose that the director of special
education states that there is not enough funding to buy the updated version of the Stanford-Binet

Emily Adams

PSYCHOLOGY 682
School Psychology: Legal and Ethical Principles and
Preventive Service Delivery
FINAL EXAM
Intelligence Scale. So she has asked you to continue giving the old version until further notice. In
the meantime, you notice that a disproportionate number of minority students, including students
with ELL backgrounds are qualified for special education.
The legal principles relevant to this case are Standard I.3; II.3; II.5; and IV.2
Standard I.3 Fairness and Justice. School psychologists promote fairness and justice. They use
their expertise to cultivate school climates that are safe and welcoming to all persons regardless of actual
or perceived characteristics, including race, ethnicity, color, religion, ancestry, national origin,
immigration status, SES, primary language, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender
expression, mental, physical, or sensory disability, or any other distinguishing characteristics.
Standard II.3 Responsible Assessment and Intervention Practices. School psychologists maintain
the highest standard for responsible professional practices in educational and psychological assessment
and direct and indirect interventions.
Standard IV.2 Respect for Law and Relationship of Law and Ethics. School psychologists are
knowledgeable of and respect laws pertinent to the practice of school psychology. In choosing an
appropriate course of action, they consider the relationship between law and the Principles for
Professional Ethics.
Standard 3.04 Avoid harm. According to this ethical code, school psychologists take steps to
avoid harming their clients/patients, students, supervisees, research participants, organizational clients,
etc. with whom they work, and to minimize harm where is it foreseeable and avoidable.
In accordance with ethical code standard 3.04, in this situation, school psychologists have a duty
to avoid harming the student by providing him/her with updated test measures to ensure he/she receives
optimal recommendations.

Emily Adams

PSYCHOLOGY 682
School Psychology: Legal and Ethical Principles and
Preventive Service Delivery
FINAL EXAM
Standard 9.08: Obsolete tests and Outdated Test Results. According to this standard, it is
considered unethical to base their assessment or intervention decisions or recommendations on data that is
outdated for the current purpose.
It is important to determine the childs primary language prior to assessing and determine their
English language proficiency in case they are proficient enough to test in English. This can be determined
by checking on the childs CELDT (Cal English Language Development Test) and see the progress he/she
has made in English.
It is considered ethical practice to discontinue administering the Stanford-Binet because it has
obsolete norms and would jeopardize the results, and therefore, the childs eligibility for services. Given
the information, I would choose to use other tests and also consider other pieces of the assessment process
such as observation, file review, interviews, etc. to create recommendations and interventions for the
student until the district can afford to buy an updated Stanford-Binet.