Ethical social justice: Do the ends justify the means?

In the United States, prohibitionist policies are used as the primary approach to combat the negative impact of substance use on society. An extensive academic literature spanning the disciplines of economics, political science, and multiculturalism documents the great social costs of the US’s “War on Drugs” both nationally and internationally. These costs come with at best marginal impact on substance abuse and other crimes linked to the drug trade. In many cases, there is reason to believe that these policies exacerbate the problems they aim to address. This paper explores psychologists’ ethical commitments to social change concerning such drug policy, given the field of psychology’s expanding commitment to social justice. We examine arguments regarding the boundaries between psychologists’ personal and professional ethics with regard to political participation. Using drug prohibition as an exemplar, we suggest that many psychologists’ political actions and professional ethics may be misaligned. Ultimately, we conclude that the endorsement of prohibitionist drug policies is in direct conflict with the guiding ethical principles put forth by the American Psychological Association’s (APA) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct.

RUDN Journal of Psychology and Pedagogics, 2018

T here are codes of ethics in psychology that explicitly refer to human rights. There are also psychologists interested in the protection and promotion of human rights who are calling for the explicit inclusion of references to human rights in all psychology ethics codes. Yet, references to human rights in ethics documents have rarely been the focus of attention in psychological ethics. This article represents the first part of a two-part article series focusing on critical issues associated with the inclusion of references to human rights in the ethical codes of psychologists, and recommendations about how psychological ethics and the human rights movement can work together in serving humanity. The first part of the article series examines issues pertaining to the interpretation of references to human rights in codes of ethics for psychologists, and the justifications for including these references in psychological ethics codes. The second part of the article series examines how the Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists can be used to extend or supplement codes of ethics in psychology, how ethical principles and human rights differ and complement each other, and how psychological ethics and the human rights movement can work together in serving humanity and improving the welfare of both persons and peoples.

American Psychologist, 2012

Much of psychological science and knowledge is significantly relevant to social justice, defined here as the goal to decrease human suffering and to promote human values of equality and justice. A commitment to social justice has evolved as a more important value in the last few decades for psychology, including for the American Psychological Association (APA). The mission, vision, goals, Ethics Code, and strategic plan of APA all provide a rationale for psychologists' involvement in systematic and visible ways of applying our knowledge to social issues. Although psychology has not been immune to the application of psychological knowledge in destructive ways, overall, psychology, many psychologists, and APA have demonstrated a commitment to social justice. This article provides a brief review of the key proponents, debates, and controversies involved in applying psychological science and knowledge to complex societal problems. Psychologists often find themselves in conflict and honest disagreement when the association addresses complex and controversial issues. An important goal is that we continue to find ways to agree or disagree in a respectful manner regardless of where each of us stands on the various positions that APA takes.

Amer J Commun Psychol, 1989

This article presents reactions to the ethical dilemmas facing community psychologists. It is suggested that community psychology has often ignored ethical dilemmas due to reliance on a perception of cultural relativity, confusion about the difference between conceptions of behavior and styles of intervention, overreliance on a consulting mode of intervention, and a lack of sound scientific bases for our work. Several alternatives are suggested, including a rights rather needs perspective, more active change agent roles, and an increase in the scientific credibility of our efforts.

Torture Journal

The post-9/11 US torture program brought attention to the critical roles of health professionals generally and of psychologists more particularly in the modern administration of torture. Over a decade of controversy in the American Psychological Association (APA) and an independent investigation finding APA collusion with the Bush administration’s torture and coercive interrogation programs led to 2015 policies restricting the activities of psychologists in national security interrogations and illegal detention sites like Guantanamo. This controversy expanded to evaluation of a broader set of issues regarding the ethical roles of psychologists in furthering military and intelligence operations, or what has become known as operational psychology. Controversy over the extent to which operational psychology activities are consistent with psychological ethics has expanded since 2015 with critics calling for policies restraining operational psychologists from involvement in activities th...

Ethics & Behavior, 2013

Prompted by the involvement of psychologists in torturous interrogations at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, the American Psychological Association (APA) revised its Ethics Code Standard 1.02 to prohibit psychologists from engaging in activities that would “justify or defend violating human rights.” The revision to Standard 1.02 followed APA policy statements condemning torture and prohibiting psychologists’ involvement in such activities that constitute a violation of human rights (APA, 2010). Cogent questions have subsequently been raised about the involvement of psychologists in other activities that could arguably lead to human rights violations, even if the activity in question is legal. While this language was designed to be expansive in defining psychologists ’ ethical responsibilities, it remains difficult to determine whether and how Standard 1.02 might apply to a particular situation. In the present analysis, we focus on the question of whether psychologists should be involved in death penalty cases.

|

2012

Professional codes of ethics are meant to set standards for the competence of psychologists and the quality of their professional actions (for which we will also use the term interventions). The codes encourage psychologists to continuously improve their level of competence. This chapter presents arguments as to how the standards or rules in such codes can contribute to the overall objective of competent practice and to the enhancement of competence practice. First we show that standards of competence can never be absolute. We also mention some distinctions between categories of rules in professional codes of ethics, adding one further distinction to existing categorizations; namely, between constituent rules that define a game and the tactical rules that are used by players. We see tactical rules as indicating ways in which psychologists can improve the level of quality of their actions. We then address the question of what constitutes the foundation for the competence of psychologists in some of the internationally better known codes. We subsequently describe four ways of anchoring ethically competent actions. Three of these are a matter of the profession and its members, viz: (i) the fund of scientific knowledge that exists in psychology and the psychologist's familiarity with this through education; (ii) the fund of professional knowledge and expertise; and (iii) professional experience. The fourth mode of anchoring places competence in broader contexts, referring to clients, sponsors, the public at large, and the legislation in a country that applies to the profession of psychology. This mode refers to the interactions between the profession and stakeholders from outside. In the concluding

Journal for Social Action in Counseling & Psychology, 2008

Even though many applied psychology programs embrace a philosophy of social justice, faculty members and trainers are often faced with the practical struggle of implementing a social justice training agenda. This article discusses both the theoretical and practical aspects of implementing a social justice training agenda in applied psychology programs.