Running head; ETHICS REACTION PAPER 1

Ethics Reaction Paper

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation
ETHICS REACTION PAPER 2

Summary

A thorough evaluation of the three articles adds insights into the field of counseling,

especially on valued based ethical decisions, the position of the American Counseling

Association on referrals, and how to embrace the tension of humanity. Each article is analyzed

in-depth, and the summarization is as follows:

First, the article by Kocet & Herlihy (2014) emphasizes that the practice of counseling is

not supposed to be value-free for counselors, especially when they introduce their expert,

individual, and cultural values into their dealings with clients. The article argues that counselors

are supposed to endeavor to incorporate their values and principles into their ethical exercise;

however, simultaneously, they are not supposed to enforce those beliefs and ideals onto their

clientele. Because of the challenges experienced in findi8ng this balance, the article proposes the

application of an approach identified as ethical bracketing in the process of counseling. The

strategy advocates for the deliberate split-up of the individual principles of a counselor from his

or her expert principles or the deliberate setting aside of the own policies of a counselor to offer

ethical and right counseling to all clients, specifically those having values, worldviews, decisions

and belief systems that are divergent to those of the counselor. Besides, the article acknowledges

that counselors are faced with value-based battles amid them and clients. To help resolve those

conflicts, utilization of a CVCM model is suggested as an effective way of exploring underlying

core issues and identifying possible barriers that could prevent a counselor from giving the

appropriate standard of care and also in ensuring the welfare of the client.

In the second article by the American Counseling Association (ACA), Martz and Kaplan

(2014) explain more about the 2014 ACA Code of Ethics especially Standard A.11.b. This shows
ETHICS REACTION PAPER 3

the significance of counselors refraining from referring both current and prospective clients on

the foundation of the counselor's individually held attitudes, principles, behaviors, and beliefs.

This implies that referral is supposed to be viewed as an intervention of last resort and that

counselors are supposed to cope with any distress with a specific client through supervision,

discussion, and continuous education. The two counselors highlight bracketing as an essential

skill that all counselors require to learn for the betterment of the client. Bracketing is portrayed

as being aware of oneself and the impact that one has on the client he or she is serving.

According to the counselors interviewed in the article, the referral of a current or prospective

client should only be done based on skill-based competence. Finally, the counselors expressed

their dissatisfaction with the removal of the guideline that dealt with end-of-life care of clients

that are terminally ill. They argue that the deletion of the standard removed what might have

been an exclusion to the regulation that referral is grounded on proficiency.

Lastly, the article by Sells & Hagedorn (2016) propose that divergences amid how

religiously conventional and religiously or socially open-minded counselors believe think, and

act exist; but, rather than solely concentrating on these divergences, the article focuses on

counselors living and prospering together and maintaining the principles they must decide upon.

With particular reference to LGBT clients, the authors use Volf's work to show how Christian

counselors, educators, and students could consistently practice in the canons of their faith and

serve entirely LGBT clients. Exclusion is portrayed as a sin and against the Biblical teachings.

According to the article, professionals and scholars in CACREP- credited counseling programs

have a distinct ethical and moral obligation to join the points on a religious/ moral facet and

materialize that joint to the aspect of the counseling work. In other words, the article shows that
ETHICS REACTION PAPER 4

counselors should serve all clients without considering the differences in their beliefs and values,

and reconciliation, as taught in the Bible, should be the guiding principle.

Reflection

Reading the articles was insightful and educational. The most significant novel

realization that occurred to me having read the articles is that referring clients based on value

differences is no only discriminatory but against the ACA Code of Ethics. In this context, I have

realized that it is normal for value differences to exist between counselors and their clients.

However, what the articles have demonstrated is that the needs of the client are more vital

compared to the wants of the counselor. This implies that it is then up to the clients to learn

strategies and approaches that they can apply to ensure that the differences in their beliefs,

values, worldviews, and decisions do not affect how they serve the clients. It is intriguing how

ACA is firmly against any form of referral, mainly if it is centered on value differences. This

stand leaves me without answers to questions like is it not overwhelming for the counselors that

they have to attend to their clients and, at the same time, incorporate ways that will ensure their

beliefs and differences do not conflict with those of the clients? Is it the fault of the counselors

that their clients have diverging views and ideas from theirs?

I feel that the ACA is right and fair in its stand of clients, not referring clients based on

value differences. The needs of the clients should be prioritized, and there is no one tike that

clients should be discriminated against or made suffer because of their different opinions and

views with the people that are supposed to help them. However, the ACA needs to reconsider the

matter of clients who are stressed by substantial end-of-life issues. This implies that counselors

should not carry the whole blame of deferral, especially if it is made based on these issues.
ETHICS REACTION PAPER 5

An assessment of the list reveals several personal and professional dilemmas that could

impact the way I handle my clients. For example, I have a belief structure embedded in me that

homosexuality is morally wrong. This would be a major dilemma when dealing with LGBTQ

issues. Also, I believe firmly in the institution of marriage and that marriage works. Thus, it

would be a dilemma dealing with issues like a man wanting to leave his wife and children to

explore sex with other women or a woman wanting to leave her husband and children to gain

independence.

Action

The readings will have a significant impact on how I do my counseling. As a Christian

believer, I believed in standing for my values and religious beliefs and not going against them.

However, I have realized that the Bible considers exclusion to be a sin. As presented in the

article by Sells & Hagedorn (2016), Paul notes in the book of Corinthians that Christ was sent by

God to restore everybody's relationship with Him. In this context, I was very skeptical when

dealing with matters of the LGBTQ community because I viewed them ungodly and going

against the teachings of God. However, I now understand that I do not have the power to judge,

and only God can do that. I have realized that exclusion simply because an individual has

different religious values and beliefs different from mines is an ultimate deed of sin toward

which, as a Christian, I should be missionally integrated to help resolve. I have realized that I

have been fast to judge people, and that is not right. I now look forward to being guided by John

8:7 "So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is

without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." I believe I am not perfect too, as a

Christian and therefore, will serve all clients, including those of the LGBTQ without

discrimination.
ETHICS REACTION PAPER 6

As a counselor, both personal and professional dilemmas are bound to occur. In case of

any dilemma, I would consult a colleague, somebody who is an expert in counseling. I would sit

down with them and figure out how to address the issue, causing the dilemma. Furthermore, I

believe that the ACA has done a great job of coming up with the code of Ethics shaping the

counseling practice. I think that these codes of ethics would be essential in helping me solve the

dilemma.
ETHICS REACTION PAPER 7

References

Kocet, M. M., & Herlihy, B. J. (2014). Addressing value‐based conflicts within the counseling

relationship: A decision‐making model. Journal of Counseling & Development, 92(2),

180-186.

Martz, E., & Kaplan, D. (2014). New responsibilities when making referrals. Counseling Today,

57(4), 24-25.

Sells, J. N., & Hagedorn, W. B. (2016). CACREP accreditation, ethics, and the affirmation of

both religious and sexual identities: A response to Smith and Okech. Journal of

Counseling & Development, 94(3), 265-279.