Ethical And Professional Conflict In Corrections Research Paper
Ethical and Professional Conflicts in Correctional Psychology
“The individual may receive treatment under one of the following: (a) in a correctional setting where both the mental health services and security needs are provided by the department of corrections;
(b) in a correctional setting where the mental health services are provided by a separately administered mental health agency and security needs are administered by corrections; (c) in a mental health services and security needs are provided by the department of mental health; and (d) in a mental health facility where the mental health services are provided by the department of mental health and the security needs are administered by the department of corrections (Nelson & Berger, …show more content…
Corrections cannot use the excuse that they expect mental health professions to be an extension of correctional officers. “In 1991, Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists was developed by the American Psychological Association’s Division 41, in an effort to “provide more specific guidelines to forensic psychologists in monitoring their professional conduct when functioning in correctional and forensic mental health facilities”. The warden is trying to use the psychologist to fuel his unfounded bias towards an alleged dangerous inmate. It is not unreasonable to evaluate the mentally – ill, before they are returned to the community. Weinberger & Sreenivasan is correct in their assessment. “The problematic element in this scenario refers to the warden’s request for a “covert” evaluation, where the inmate is deprived of his right to informed …show more content…
(1980), Standards for psychology services in adult jails and prisons. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 7, 81-127.
American Psychological Association. (1992). Ethical principles of psychological Association. (1992). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Washington,DC: Author.
Board approves task force guidelines on treating prisoners, detainees. (1989, May 5). Psychiatric News, pp. 7, 19.
Bowring v. Godwin, 551 F. 2d 44 (1977).
Brodsky, S.L. (1980).Ethical issues for psychologists in corrections. In J. Monahan (Ed.), Who is the client? (pp. 63-92). Washington, DC. : American Psychological Association.
Clingempeel, W. G., Mulvey, E., & Reppucci, N.D. (1980). A national study of ethical dilemmas of psychologists in the criminal justice system. In J. Monahan (Ed.), Who is the client? (pp. 126-153). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Committee on Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists. (1991). Specialty guidelines for forensic psychologists. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 655-665.
Dubler, N.N. (Ed.) (1986). Standards for health services in correctional institutions. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association.
Vitek v. Jones, 445 U.S. 480 (1980).
Wellman v. Faulker, 715F. 2d 269
“The individual may receive treatment under one of the following: (a) in a correctional setting where both the mental health services and security needs are provided by the department of corrections;
(b) in a correctional setting where the mental health services are provided by a separately administered mental health agency and security needs are administered by corrections; (c) in a mental health services and security needs are provided by the department of mental health; and (d) in a mental health facility where the mental health services are provided by the department of mental health and the security needs are administered by the department of corrections (Nelson & Berger, …show more content…
Corrections cannot use the excuse that they expect mental health professions to be an extension of correctional officers. “In 1991, Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists was developed by the American Psychological Association’s Division 41, in an effort to “provide more specific guidelines to forensic psychologists in monitoring their professional conduct when functioning in correctional and forensic mental health facilities”. The warden is trying to use the psychologist to fuel his unfounded bias towards an alleged dangerous inmate. It is not unreasonable to evaluate the mentally – ill, before they are returned to the community. Weinberger & Sreenivasan is correct in their assessment. “The problematic element in this scenario refers to the warden’s request for a “covert” evaluation, where the inmate is deprived of his right to informed …show more content…
(1980), Standards for psychology services in adult jails and prisons. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 7, 81-127.
American Psychological Association. (1992). Ethical principles of psychological Association. (1992). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Washington,DC: Author.
Board approves task force guidelines on treating prisoners, detainees. (1989, May 5). Psychiatric News, pp. 7, 19.
Bowring v. Godwin, 551 F. 2d 44 (1977).
Brodsky, S.L. (1980).Ethical issues for psychologists in corrections. In J. Monahan (Ed.), Who is the client? (pp. 63-92). Washington, DC. : American Psychological Association.
Clingempeel, W. G., Mulvey, E., & Reppucci, N.D. (1980). A national study of ethical dilemmas of psychologists in the criminal justice system. In J. Monahan (Ed.), Who is the client? (pp. 126-153). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Committee on Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists. (1991). Specialty guidelines for forensic psychologists. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 655-665.
Dubler, N.N. (Ed.) (1986). Standards for health services in correctional institutions. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association.
Vitek v. Jones, 445 U.S. 480 (1980).
Wellman v. Faulker, 715F. 2d 269