a. make it a practice to consult with other professionals about the matter. _ 17, In recruiting clients, counselors should realize ‘a it is acceptable to split fees with another professional who has referred a client to a private practitioner. : . they have an ethical right to expect to receive a fee for making 4 refetral to another counselor. ¢ they do not accept fees for referring clients. ; . they should expect to receive referrals in return when they make referrals to another professional. 5 e Sama ee SRE 18, It is not ethical for counselors to discriminate based on differences in a age. b. sexual orientation.ACA Ethicatsran was ajourey—shared bya host of professionals committed to ethical excellence dnd creating a higher standard of counseling practice that respects the impor tant work that takes place in the counseling relationship. When issues were discussed that were extremely challenging or when divergent perspectives ex: {sted, members of the taskforce consulted with experts in the field outside the taskforce and even outside the association who specialized in those issues. Oftentimes, members provided specific recommended language to incorpo- rate into the document. Although members of the Code Revision Taskforce were the primary authors of the 2005 Code of Ethics, many hands, minds, and hearts contributed to its creation. Changes in the 2005 Code of Ethics Although it would be nearly impossible to highlight every change madeo the 2005 ACA Code of Ethics, a brief overview is provided to acclimate read- ers to some of the main differences in the new Code. The Standards of Practice found in the 1995 document were removed as a separate section and were integrated into the body of the main document. The original intent of the Standards of Practice was to provide members and nonmem- bers of AGA with a concise outline of the minimum expectations for ethi- cal behavior. This purpose became unclear, however, when it came to ac~ tual implementation and use of the document in ethical case adjudica- tions and for personal study and use. An updated Preamble and clearly stated Purposes section are new additions to the 2005 document. ‘The 1995 Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice contained eight main sections, and these have been retained in the 2005 Code of Ethics, with slight variations in the titles of the sections: A. The Counseling Relationship; B. Confidentiality, Privileged’ Communication, and Privacy; C. Professional Responsibility; D. Rela- tionships With Other Professionals; E. Evaluation, Assessment, and Interpreta- tion; F Supervision, Training, and Teaching; G. Research and Publication; and H. Resolving Ethical Issues. Some key areas new to the 2005 edition are: Poten- tially Beneficial Interactions (A.5.4.), End-of Life Care for Terminally Ill Clients (A9), Technology Applications (A.12.), Deceased Clients (B3.£), Counselor Incapacitation or Termination of Practice (C.2.h.), Historical and Social Preju- dices in the Diagnosis of Pathology (E.5.c.), Innovative Theoriesand Techniques (F6-), use of the term research “participants” rather than “subjects” (Section G), Plagiarism (G.5.b.), and Conflicts Between Ethics and Laws (H.1b.). The 2005 Code also infuses multicultural and diversity issues throughout the docu- ment, Readers are encouraged to review the entire 2005 ACA Code of Ethics and ‘compare it to the 1995 document to see all the changes that were made. Prescriptive Versus Aspirational Ethics ‘An ongoing struggle among the members of the Code Revision Taskforce was how to balance two needs: (1) to create more prescriptive guidelines that clearly demarcate ethical responsil of counseling professionals of Snook wei iain