Using an Ethical Decision-Making Model to Address Ethical

Using an Ethical Decision-Making Model to Address

Ethical Dilemmas in School Counseling

Timothy Brown, Stephen A. Armstrong, Samuel Bore, and Chris Simpson

Texas A&M University-Commerce

Abstract

School counselors frequently face ethical dilemmas. These dilemmas often involve

relationships with principals, parents, and other stakeholders. School counselors may

confront complex ethical issues involving confidentiality, student safety, parental rights,

and social media. The American School Counselor Association recommends following

an ethical decision-making model when dealing with complex ethical issues. An

explanatory case study is provided along with sample dilemmas to illustrate how an

ethical decision-making model might be used within the school setting.

Keywords: school counseling, ethics, ethical decision-making, ethical dilemmas

Using an Ethical Decision-Making Model to Address

Ethical Dilemmas in School Counseling

Ethics refer to moral and value-based decision making. Professional ethics

extend beyond personal values and include behaviors deemed as good by the

profession. These values have been codified and accepted by the counseling

profession. Ethical codes were developed out of a need for counselors to morally solve

practical problems in a consistent manner (Freeman, Engels, & Altekruse, 2004).

Professional counselors, including school counselors, are required to adhere to an

ethical code (American Counseling Association [ACA], 2014). This article focuses on

ethical dilemmas that can arise for school counselors and approaches school

counselors can take to solving these ethical dilemmas.

In general, most ethical problems are not difficult for school counselors to resolve.

However, complex ethical dilemmas can occur when the solution appears ambiguous.

When counselors cannot find a clear decision, they will often review an ethical code

(Freeman et al., 2004); however, knowing the ethical codes differs greatly from applying

the ethical code (Lambie, Ieva, Mullen, & Hayes, 2011). At times ethical principles can

be at odds with each other. When this happens, a complex ethical dilemma results

(Freeman et al., 2004; Lazovsky, 2008). When faced with a complex ethical dilemma,

school counselors may desire to use a simple solution (Foster & Black, 2007) such as

only trusting their value judgment (Kitchener, 1984). They may also turn to the code of

ethics for answers (Freeman et al., 2004). However, a more in-depth process is often

needed.

The American Counseling Association published the most recent edition of its

Code of Ethics in 2014. The American School Counselor Association (ASCA) also

published its most recent edition of the Ethical Code for School Counselors, an ethical

code directly addressing many of the dilemmas unique to school counselors, in 2016.

Both codes were designed to help counselors make decisions that will protect both the

students they serve and the profession (Schmidt, 2008).

Ethical decisions can be difficult for school counselors because they are

constantly seeking to minimize any harm while maximizing benefit to students (ACA,

2014; Lambie et al., 2011). School counselors often approach these ethical decisions

with a personal sense of morality and values. These personal values provide the basis

for the frequent small ethical decisions a school counselor must make (Levitt, Farry, &

Mazzarella, 2015).

The way school counselors make ethical decisions may vary by their level of

professional development (Foster & Black, 2007). As school counselors gain experience,

they may rely more on intuition or instinct than on a more conscious process of ethical

decision making (Levitt et al., 2015). At times school counselors may also consult a

variety of sources such as colleagues, ethical codes, and school district policy when

making decisions (Lambie et al., 2011).

Ethical Decision-Making Model

When faced with an ethical dilemma, school counselors may refer to ethical

codes for guidance (Bodenhorn, 2006; Freeman et al., 2004). Because school

counselors regularly face ethical dilemmas (Bodenhorn, 2006; Hicks et al., 2014; Moyer,

Sullivan & Growcock, 2012), they need a methodology for confronting these dilemmas.

The Ethical Standards for School Counselors states a school counselor should use an

ethical decision-making model when faced with an ethical dilemma (ASCA, 2016).

School counselors should also document the steps of their decision-making (ASCA;

Hicks et al., 2014).

Over 30 ethical decision-making models are available to school counselors

(Cottone & Clause, 2000). These models differ in emphasis. Some focus on

multicultural considerations or community while others focus on counselor education or

school counseling (Levitt et al., 2015). While ethical models are prevalent in the

literature (Remley & Herlihy, 2016), there is no clear criteria for selecting one model

over another (Cottone & Claus, 2000). However, ASCA (2016) listed the Solutions to

Ethical Problems in Schools (STEPS) as an example of a model designed for school

counselors in the Ethical Code for School Counselors. This model was created by

Carolyn Stone (2013). The model contains nine steps:

1. Define the problem emotionally and intellectually.

2. Apply the ASCA and ACA ethical codes and the law.

3. Consider the students’ chronological and developmental levels.

4. Consider the setting, parental rights, and minors’ rights.

5. Apply the moral principles.

6. Determine your potential courses of action and their consequences.

7. Evaluate the selected action.

8. Consult.

9. Implement the course of action.

This model provides school counselors with a clear enumerated approach to

ethical decision-making. Using a concrete approach may provide comfort to some

counselors when faced with complex ethical dilemmas. This model will be used to

address the explanatory case and ethical dilemmas that school counselors might

encounter.

Case of Ms. Hannah

Ms. Hannah is a first year school counselor at suburban elementary school in the

southern United States. She holds a master’s in school counseling and has completed a

one year internship prior to accepting the position. During her master’s degree, Ms.

Hannah completed a course in counseling ethics. This course required Ms. Hannah to

read both the ACA (2014) Code of Ethics and the ASCA (2016) Ethical Code for School

Counselors. At the outset of her first year, Ms. Hannah felt confident she would be

competent to practice ethically; however, Ms. Hannah encountered several ethical

dilemmas soon after beginning at her new school. These ethical dilemmas are listed at

the end of each section to illustrate possible ethical concerns. Following each dilemma

an example of how to use the STEPS ethical decision-making model is provided.

Ethical Dilemmas Related to Confidentiality

The law does not specify the rights of minors in regards to confidentiality

(Wehrman, Williams, Field, & Schroeder, 2010). This may be one of the reasons

confidentiality is the most frequently considered ethical dilemma (Bodenhorn, 2006).

While the ACA (2014) Code of Ethics and ASCA (2016) Ethical Code for School

Counselors offer specific guidelines on confidentiality, ethical problems arise when

school counselors are conflicted between maintaining confidentiality and helping the

student in other ways. Ethical dilemmas can also arise when a faculty member or

administrator requests confidential information (Bodenhorn). Lazovsky (2008) noted that

serving the student and maintaining confidentiality can at times conflict. Additionally,

some administrators require their school counselors to disclose infractions of the rules

(O’Connell, 2012).

School counselors typically break confidentiality for justifiable reasons (Lazovsky,

2008). However, professional development levels of school counselors play a role in

their choice of when to break confidentiality. Newly certified school counselors

experience an internal conflict when requests from colleagues and administrators

conflict with their ethical training. More experienced school counselors may become

more lax over time about maintaining student confidentiality (Trice-Black, Kiper Riechel,

& Shillingford, 2013)

School counselors typically provide some type of informed consent about

confidentiality; however, not all school counselors maintain confidentiality to the same

degree. School counselors may also differentiate between academic information and

personal information when considering the limits to confidentiality (Lehr, Lehr, &

Sumarah, 2007).

Limits to confidentiality can be discussed with students and faculty at the

beginning of the school year (Froeschle & Crews, 2010). Students should be informed

about limits to confidentiality prior to their initial counseling sessions (ASCA, 2016; Keim

& Cobia, 2010). The school counselor should take into account student competency

when requesting any type of informed consent (ACA, 2014; ASCA, 2016, Lehr et al.,

2007).

Ms. Hannah’s Dilemma

A fourth grade girl named Julie was referred to Ms. Hannah. During the course of

their visit, Julie tells Ms. Hannah her dad is in jail. Julie also says they have been living

in hotels or in a friend’s living room when her mom cannot afford a hotel. Julie begs Ms.

Hannah not to tell anyone because she will get in trouble if her mom finds out she told.

Ms. Hannah has met the mom, and believes mom would be receptive to help. Ms.

Hannah also has a phone number for a local charity that helps with short-term housing.

Should Ms. Hannah call mom to help Julie and her family? Does she risk getting Julie in

trouble in an attempt to help?

To approach this problem using the STEPS ethical decision-making model, Ms.

Hannah began by:

1. Defining the problem both emotionally and intellectually. Emotionally, Ms.

Hannah has felt worried about Julie having a place to sleep. She also worried

the relationship with Julie could be damaged if she violated confidentiality with

the student who clearly needed support. Intellectually, she knew Julie’s mom

and suspected the mom would be receptive to help. She also hoped the mom

would not be angry with Julie for telling this family secret.

2. Ms. Hannah then reviewed the ACA (2014) Code of Ethics and the ASCA

(2016) Ethical Standards for School Counselors. She paid particular attention

to A.2.e in the ASCA ethical standards. This stated a school counselor keeps

all information confidential unless there is serious or foreseeable harm. It also

stated a school counselor should seek consultation when unclear about what

constitutes serious and foreseeable harm. Ms. Hannah was unsure if

homelessness falls into this category.

3. Ms. Hannah then considered the chronological and developmental levels of

the student. She noted that the student may not understand the seriousness

of homelessness compared to the seriousness of getting in trouble with mom.

4. Next, she considered the setting, parental rights and minor’s rights. She

believed Julie has the right to confidentiality.

5. Ms. Hannah then applied moral principles. She believed strongly in being

beneficent. This driving ethical principle made Ms. Hannah want to share the

information. She was also concerned about nonmaleficence. She did not want

to cause harm to Julie by her interference or harm the relationship she has

formed with Julie.

6. Ms. Hannah determined a couple of potential courses of action and their

consequences. If she helped the family find housing, it could benefit the

family greatly but hurt the relationship she has with Julie. If she did not help

the family find housing, the family would continue to suffer unnecessarily, but

her relationship with Julie may remain intact. Ms. Hannah also noted Julie’s

absences from school had become more frequent, so there were academic

consequences as well.

7. Ms. Hannah decided to tell Julie’s mom about the housing. As she evaluated

the selected course of action, she believed the benefits outweighed the harm.

8. Before taking action, Ms. Hannah consulted with another school counselor

who had been assigned as her first year mentor. Her mentor suggested Ms.

Hannah visit with Julie and discuss the problem with her first, illustrating the

two options, before talking to mom. By doing this, she may preserve the

relationships because Julie will know why Ms. Hannah was speaking to mom.

Julie was an articulate and intelligent girl. Ms. Hannah believed she would be

able to understand the dilemma.

9. Ms. Hannah visited with Julie. Julie’s anxiety had already calmed down since

the last visit. Julie listened to the dilemma and consented to telling mom

about the community aid. Ms. Hannah then visited with mom and connected

her with the resource.

Ethical Dilemmas Related to Student Safety

Suicidal ideations and self-injurious behavior are common among teens

(Pawłowska, Potembska, Zygo, & Olajossy, 2015). School counselors often address

these issues, and the majority of school counselors feel competent to work with

students who self-injure (Roberts-Dobie & Donatelle, 2007). When a school counselor

works with a student who is self-injuring, they must be able to assess the level of risk to

the student (Bernes & Bardick, 2007; Hall, Rushing, & Beale, 2010). However, formal

risk assessments should be used with professional discretion and caution (ASCA, 2016).

School counselors must also inform parents and/or authorities if the school counselor

believes if a student is a danger to herself or others (ASCA, 2016; Huey, 2011).

Some school counselors may breach confidentiality more often in cases where

signs of self-injury were visible. A school policy that defines when school counselors

must break confidentiality in cases of student harm may aid the school counselor with

knowing when to break confidentiality (Moyer, Sullivan, & Growcock, 2012). Many

administrators have such policies in place at their schools (O’Connell, 2012).

Parents must be contacted in all cases of foreseeable harm, including threats to

self or others (Hall et al., 2010); however, it may be helpful to provide students with a

choice of how to communicate the situation with their parents (Froeschle & Crews,

2010). School counselors seek to provide students with autonomy whenever possible

(ASCA, 2016).

Many students who are in need of mental health care are not receiving these

services. Leaving these needs untreated can impact the student’s academic success,

social interactions, and escalate into additional struggles involving student safety and

physical health. Students from low income homes are at an even greater risk of these

problems. While school counselors may desire to connect the student with services, the

link between community programs and schools can be poor. This can leave the school

counselor as the primary mental health provider for these students. This is a problem

when many counselors do not feel adequately trained to address these problems

(Walley, Grothaus, & Craigen, 2009). The problem is compounded by the ethical

guideline stating a school counselor should provide only brief interventions (ASCA,

2016).

Ms. Hannah’s Dilemma

Jack, a fifth grader, was referred to Ms. Hannah for lack of motivation. Ms.

Hannah realized Jack has many symptoms of severe depression. Ms. Hannah visited

with Jack. Jack experienced some improvement after two visits. Jack was again

referred to Ms. Hannah two weeks later. Ms. Hannah visited with Jack again, and sets

up a conference with mom. During the parent conference, Ms. Hannah explained she

had seen Jack three times, and was concerned about him. She listed all the symptoms

she had seen without offering a diagnosis. She explained to his mom that the school

district had a rule stating counselors can only see a child three times for an issue, and

must offer a parent a list of outside counselors for additional help because school

counselors only provide brief interventions. Mom stated she appreciated the help. Mom

had also noticed the problem, and suspected Jack was purposely hitting his head on

things; however, she did not have the time or money to take Jack to counseling. She

asked if Ms. Hannah would see Jack for a few more sessions. Ms. Hannah believed her

director would reprimand her for agreeing, but also believed she must help Jack. Should

Ms. Hannah violate the district policy to help Jack?

1. Using the STEPS ethical decision-making model, Ms. Hannah began by

defining the problem emotionally and intellectually. Ms. Hannah wanted to

help Jack and felt frustrated with mom because she believed mom was more

unwilling than unable to take Jack to counseling. Ms. Hannah was also aware

that one of the resources she provided mom was a counseling center that

provides free counseling.

2. Ms. Hannah considered the ASCA and ACA ethical codes as she thought

about the dilemma. She noted ASCA (2016, A.1.b) states school counselors

only provide brief counseling and provide resources for long term counseling

needs. She also noted section A.9.C (ASCA, 2016) which stated that in cases

where a student is a danger to self a school counselor should emphasize the

need to seek additional services. It also states a counselor may need to

provide a report to Child Protective Services if the parents do not seek help.

3. Ms. Hannah then considered the chronological and developmental level of

Jack. Jack was an 11-year-old boy. Lack of motivation to do school work was

not uncommon among his peer group. Jack had never stated he wanted to

hurt himself to Ms. Hannah. She had learned this from mom. This may have

been due to Jack not being overly verbal about his emotional experience.

This would have been age appropriate, especially if he comes from a home

that does not support this kind of interaction.

4. Ms. Hannah also thought about the setting, parental rights and minor’s rights.

She noted that the parents have the right to direct the medical care of their

children. She also noted the school setting was restrictive in terms of the time

and care she could give one child because of her many responsibilities.

5. As Ms. Hannah thought about the dilemma, she applied moral and ethical

principles. She weighed the parent’s autonomy, the mom’s ability to choose

the care of her children, against beneficence, Ms. Hannah’s desire to help this

child. Ms. Hannah did not think she could adequately provide the care for

Jack in the school setting. As she realized this, she considered the principle

of veracity, being truthful with Jack’s parents.

6. Ms. Hannah reviewed potential courses of action. She could attempt to see

Jack, but did not believe she could fulfill this promise. She could also meet

with mom again and emphasize the severity of the concern. Due to mom’s

resistance the first time, she did not know if this would be helpful.

7. She decided to meet with mom. She believes this had the greatest potential

for helping Jack. It also aligned with the ethical code.

8. Before meeting with mom, Ms. Hannah consulted with her mentor. Her

mentor suggests she once again provide the resources when Ms. Hannah

meets with mom. She also suggested empathizing with mom’s concerns

about time and money. Ms. Hannah should remind mom that there was a free

option available.

9. Ms. Hannah implemented the course of action by once again meeting with

mom, and attempted a spirit of collaboration and understanding while

emphasizing the importance of Jack’s safety.

Ethical Dilemmas Related to Parental Rights

Parental rights are a common cause of ethical dilemmas for school counselors.

Some school counselors believe parental rights create the most difficult ethical

dilemmas. These dilemmas can include sharing information in cases of divorce and

custody litigation, parents who request confidential information about their child, and

dual relationships that can develop between parents and school counselors (Bodenhorn,

2006).

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA; 1974) is a law designed

to protect student information. If a school counselor releases any information without

parent consent, they have violated this protection. A student may also provide legal

consent if the student has reached the age of majority. Parents may request all

education records the school has regarding their children (Hall et al., 2010). School

counselors must adhere to legal requirements, but their primary obligation is to the

student (Huey, 2011). It may be helpful for school counselors to work with parents when

they make records request and educate them about privacy and confidentiality rights

(Huss, Bryant, & Mulet, 2008).

School counselors are obligated to report all cases of suspected neglect or

abuse. If they fail to report abuse, they may be legally liable (Hall et al., 2010). Neglect

can include a parent’s failure to seek mental health treatment for their child (Froeschle &

Crews, 2010). However, some school counselors do not report abuse because they

have had negative past experiences reporting, they do not believe they have enough

evidence, or they do not believe authorities will investigate the report (Bryant, 2009).

Ms. Hannah’s Dilemma

A fifth grader named Henry self-referred himself to Ms. Hannah. During their visit,

Henry shared he was sexually attracted to other boys. Later that day, Henry’s mother

calls Ms. Hannah. The mom asks Ms. Hannah what she and Henry talked about. Ms.

Hannah attempted to find out the reason behind the call, but Henry’s mother persisted.

Ms. Hannah did not ask Henry if she could share the information with anyone. She also

did not know if the information would be helpful or hurtful if shared. How should she

proceed?

1. Ms. Hannah approached this dilemma by defining the problem emotionally

and intellectually. Ms. Hannah had a great desire to please and feared

disappointing a parent in her new role as a school counselor. She also feared

damaging the relationship with the student if she broke confidentiality.

Additionally, she believed the information was extremely sensitive and the

student had a right to decide when and with whom to share it.

2. Ms. Hannah referred to the ethical code and noticed A.1.f in the ASCA (2016)

code. This stated school counselors have a primary obligation to keep

student’s information confidential while acknowledging a parent’s right to be a

“guiding voice in their children’s lives.”

3. Henry was 11 years old. Ms. Hannah realized he was beginning to explore his

sexuality and was at a vulnerable stage.

4. Ms. Hannah also considered the student’s right to give consent to reveal that

information to his mom. Ms. Hannah had not sought or received consent to

disclose any of the information. She did not know the family culture of the

student, and did not know how well the information would be received by

mom.

5. She also believed this was a question of fidelity and nonmaleficence. Ms.

Hannah informed all students before they began counseling that the session

would be confidential with the exception of certain circumstances involving

safety. Henry’s Mom’s request did not involve student safety, so she would be

violating the spirit of good faith in which Henry shared the information. Ms.

Hannah worried about causing unintentional harm.

6. Ms. Hannah saw two options: tell Henry’s mom the information and violate

Henry’s confidentiality or do not tell Henry’s mom the information and risk

mom complaining to her principal about her interference and refusal to share

information about her child.

7. Ms. Hannah believed the best course of action was to maintain confidentiality

and risk mom’s displeasure.

8. However, she consulted her mentor before taking action. Her mentor

suggests another option - meet with Henry and discuss with him what things

he would like his mom to know. If there was information he felt comfortable

sharing, Ms. Hannah could safely disclose that information to mom.

9. Ms. Hannah agreed that might be helpful. She met with Henry and he did not

want mom to know about his attraction to boys yet, but he felt comfortable

with her knowing about his academic frustrations. Ms. Hannah called mom

and disclosed this information.

Ethical Dilemmas Related to the Behavior of Other Educators

Teachers (Trice-Black et al., 2013) and administrators (O’Connell, 2012) may

seek to know confidential details from counseling sessions. Some school counselors

choose to breach confidentiality with the faculty member who referred the student (Lehr

et al., 2007). Faculty requesting confidential information may be asking because of a

misunderstanding of the school counseling role, and it can be helpful to educate the

faculty about the limits of confidentiality (Trice-Black et al., 2015). However, some

administrators may demand to know the details of a counseling session (O’Connell).

These various demands can create a difficult environment for the school counselor.

Navigating this environment requires political sensibilities to serve both the students and

the stakeholders (Stone, 2010).

Relationships are an important factor in deciding many ethical dilemmas (Levitt et

al., 2015). Dual relationships can further complicate matters. School counselors should

avoid dual relationships with teachers and administrators (ASCA, 2016). To avoid dual

relationships, school counselors should not counsel fellow faculty (Froeschle & Crews,

2010).

Ms. Hannah’s Dilemma

A teacher approached Ms. Hannah, and stated she believed a fifth grade boy in

her class was using drugs. Ms. Hannah talked to the boy, and the boy admitted to

smoking marijuana the summer before school started. He also claimed he has not used

it since. After the visit, the principal approached Ms. Hannah, and asked what she

discovered. How should Ms. Hannah respond?

Ms. Hannah approached this dilemma using the STEPS ethical decision-making

model.

1. She was concerned about this student. While he stated that he only smoked

marijuana once, she knew students sometimes provide pieces of information

over time to test trust and avoid getting into too much trouble. She also

worried that, if she did not tell her principal what he wanted to know, he would

lose faith in her; however, sharing what the student confided in her would

break confidentiality.

2. Ms. Hannah turned to the ethical codes for guidance with this dilemma. She

noticed in the ASCA (2016, B.2.q) ethical standards that school counselors

should collaborate with administrators to provide optimum services for

students. She also noted section A.2.e which stated school counselors should

keep information confidential except in cases of serious and foreseeable

harm. She did not know if limited drug use would fall under this exception.

3. Ms. Hannah considered the student’s developmental level. The student told

her in confidence. Because the principal’s role is to impose discipline, he may

not have said the same thing if the principal was present. The student was

also at an impressionable age. It was not likely a student this young was

accessing drugs without help.

4. Ms. Hannah also wondered about the parent’s right to know about the drug

use. Because this can affect the wellbeing of the child, Ms. Hannah began to

wonder if parents should be notified.

5. Ms. Hannah did not want to negatively affect the student’s life. The student

told her in confidence that the drug was used one time. There are additional

questions about how the student accessed the drugs that could affect the

long-term wellbeing of the student. In this case, fidelity to the student was

opposed with nonmaleficence because her silence could potentially cause

harm.

6. Ms. Hannah saw the following options: tell no one, tell the parent only, tell the

principal only, or tell the principal and the parent. Each option had pros and

cons. She believed that she must alert someone because of the age of the

child and safety. She chose to tell the mom only.

7. She believed the parent has a right to know, but the principal did not need to

know.

8. However, she decided to consult her mentor before taking action. Her mentor

agreed that the developmental level and age of the child significantly

increased the risk of access to and use of drugs, and the parent should be

notified. She also agreed that the principal did not need to know because the

incident was one time and happened away from school related activities. She

suggested telling the principal that she wishes to maintain the confidentiality

of the session, but she would alert him if a school safety issue arises.

9. Ms. Hannah followed these suggestions and met with the parents.

Ethical Dilemmas Related to Spirituality

School counselors do not impose their personal values and beliefs on their

students (ACA, 2014; ASCA, 2016). However, school counselors are allowed to discuss

spiritual issues with their students. There is a difference between religion and spirituality,

and recognizing that difference is fundamentally important in ethically working with

spiritual issues. While separation between church and state protects students from

government employees, including school counselors, from imposing a religion upon

them, discussion of a student’s spirituality does not fall under this mandate. Spirituality

differs from religion because it is highly personal and individualized. It involves the

student’s personal beliefs and experiences, and may be addressed in a counseling

session (Dobmeier, 2011).

Because school counselors restrain themselves from imposing their beliefs (ACA,

2014; ASCA, 2016), they must find a balance between this restraint and helping the

student develop greater awareness of their own spiritual beliefs (Lambie et al., 2008).

School counselors are important in students’ lives, and affect the way familial spirituality

influences the spiritual development of their students (Davis, 2011). While school

counselors may desire to use a laissez-faire approach to spirituality in order to avoid

ethical conflict, this may not be ethical either because of the important role spirituality

plays in a student’s life (Magaldi-Dopman & Park-Taylor, 2014). However, school

counselors fear addressing these issues because of a fear of litigation (Dobmeier, 2011;

Lambie et al.). While school counselors may openly discuss spiritual issues with

students (Lambie, Davis, & Miller, 2008), the school counselors must also be competent

to work with spiritual issues (ACA, 2014; ASCA, 2016; Sink & Devlin, 2011).

Ms. Hannah’s Dilemma

During a visit, a 12-year-old girl named Tamatha shared with Ms. Hannah that

she had doubts about her religion. Tamatha attended the same church as Ms. Hannah,

and Ms. Hannah strongly believed in her faith. She also knew Tamatha’s family was

deeply devout, and would respond negatively to any suggestion of faithlessness. How

should Ms. Hannah proceed?

Ms. Hannah approached this dilemma using the STEPS ethical decision-making

model.

1. She began by looking at the problem emotionally and intellectually. She was

very worried about Tamatha’s decision. Ms. Hanna was aware that these

feelings were based on her own spiritual beliefs. She was also aware that this

biased her outlook. Additionally, she worried about her own reputation with

this family and in the church. If this student told others she talked with Ms.

Hannah about her faith, and then abandoned it, Ms. Hannah feared retribution

from her spiritual community. She also feared Tamatha’s family would

discipline Tamatha if she discloses her doubts to them. While this was not a

part of their faith in general, she knew Tamatha’s father had a history of using

discipline as a teaching tool in Tamatha’s home. Ms. Hannah wanted to

protect Tamatha from this reaction.

2. In the preamble, ASCA (2016) ethical standards stated that a student’s

spiritual identity should be respected and affirmed. Section B.3.i from the

same ethical standards stated school counselors monitor their own

awareness of prejudice against spiritual beliefs and seek to become a more

competent counselor in this area.

3. Ms. Hannah knew that it was developmentally appropriate for Tamatha to

question her spirituality and family of origin’s beliefs. This was a major part of

development and should not be inhibited.

4. However, she worried about the setting of the school as a place to discuss

these issues. She remained worried that the community may turn on her if

they found out she was having these discussions in the school. She also

knew students have a right to a school counseling program that affirms their

beliefs.

5. To impose her own beliefs on this student would violate the student’s

autonomy. However, Ms. Hannah believed giving improper spiritual guidance

would harm the student and violate the principle of nonmaleficence. On the

other hand, it would violate the principle of justice to push a certain system of

beliefs. She began to wonder if it would just be better to avoid spirituality all

together, but knew this may conflict with the principle of beneficence.

6. Ms. Hannah saw her options as to either avoid the issue during counseling,

openly discuss the issue while trying to limit her own bias, or openly discuss

this issue and try to help Tamatha understand the value of her family’s belief

system. She decided to try the second one to provide Tamatha support.

7. She believed this would meet Tamatha’s needs and would try not to worry

about any community backlash that might result.

8. Before taking action, she sought consultation from her mentor. Her mentor

commended Ms. Hannah for being aware of her own bias. She also

suggested that Ms. Hannah might need additional training and supervision on

working with this issue. She suggested a book for Ms. Hannah to read and

offered to connect her with another counselor in the district who had had a lot

of experience with this issue for peer supervision. This would allow Ms.

Hannah to support this student while meeting the ethical guidelines of

competency.

9. Ms. Hannah decided to read the book and met with the peer supervisor in

conjunction with meeting with the student to discuss the issue of spirituality.

Ethical Dilemmas Related to Social Media

Ethical issues involving social media include a student’s right to privacy,

maintaining professional boundaries, and maintaining professionalism (Mullen, Griffith,

Greene, & Lambie, 2014). School counselors should maintain professional boundaries

when working with student and parents. This helps avoid dual relationships which could

impair objectivity (ASCA, 2016); however, boundary issues are complex (Bodenhorn,

2006). School counselors frequently participate with or live in the community and may

be connected with parents on social media for other reasons. Sometimes these reasons

predate their employment as a school counselor.

Privacy can be a major concern when a school counselor uses social media. If a

school counselor collects information about a student or family online, the school

counselor may have violated the student or family’s right to privacy (Harris & Robinson

Kurpius, 2014). This can also go the other way. If a school counselor posts something

about a student online, they can be guilty of violating that student’s right to privacy. For

example, a school counselor might post a synopsis of a student’s successes for that

academic year accompanied by a picture of the student. While this seems innocent, the

school counselor may have violated the student’s right to privacy if the school counselor

did not first gain consent from the student and parents.

Social media can have a disinhibiting effect on those who interact through it. A

school counselor may maintain professionalism at work, but may express things over

social media that the school counselor would never say to a person or group in their

physical presence (Mullen et al., 2014). School counselors have an obligation to behave

professionally (ASCA, 2016). Their actions not only reflect the school counselor as an

individual, but they also represent the profession of school counseling as a whole.

When school counselors choose to post online, their words can reflect on the school

and the district as well (Mullen et al.).

Ms. Hannah’s Dilemma

Ms. Hannah received a request to connect through a social media website from a

mom with whom she had visited with several times that year. The mom had recently

been through a divorce, and Ms. Hannah knew the mom was in need of support. She

also knew the mom had to take a second job to compensate for the change in income

and could no longer come to school during school hours. How should Ms. Hannah

proceed?

Ms. Hannah decided to use the STEPS ethical decision-making model to

address this issue.

1. She began by considering her own thoughts and feelings about the problem.

She wanted to help this mom by making herself more accessible. She also

feared the mom would feel rejected if she declined the request. Ms. Hannah

understood she was primarily responsible for the welfare of the student, but

believed that helping the mom would help the student.

2. Ms. Hannah turned to the ethical codes for guidance. In the ASCA (2016)

ethical standards, section A.1.d stated school counselors recognize that

parents play a vital role in the lives of students. Section A.5.c from the same

code stated school counselors avoid dual relationships with parents that

might damage the student/counselor relationship. A.5.d stated school

counselors maintain professional boundaries when connecting to parents

through social media.

3. Ms. Hannah considered the developmental level of the student. The student

was 6 years old and relied entirely on the support of her mom, who had sole

custody of her.

4. Ms. Hannah noted the parent contacted her on her personal social media

account. She maintained a school counseling account sanctioned by the

district for school-wide communication purposes, but the parent sought out

her personal account to request the social media connection.

5. Ms. Hannah was primarily concerned with the issue of beneficence, wanting

to help. She was also aware having overly permeable boundaries could lead

to harm of herself or the parent which would violate the principle of

nonmaleficence.

6. She saw her options as either accept the connection request or deny it. She

wanted to connect, but ultimately decided to deny the request.

7. She believed accepting the request would move the focus from helping the

parent support the student to a more personal relationship with the parent,

and it would cross the line of professional support.

8. Before she took action, she decided to consult with her mentor. Her mentor

affirmed that accepting the friend request would create a dual relationship and

violate Ms. Hannah’s professional boundaries. She suggested that Ms.

Hannah invite the parent to connect by phone during her lunch break when

she needed to discuss an issue related to her daughter.

9. Ms. Hannah followed this suggestion by declining the request and calling the

mom to set up a phone conference.

Conclusion

The literature suggests confidentiality, student safety, parental rights, behavior of

other educators, spirituality, and social media are the most commonly addressed

categories of ethical concerns for school counselors (Bodenhorn, 2006; Davis, 2011;

Froeschle & Crews, 2010; Hall et al., 2010; Harris & Robinson Kurpius, 2014; Hicks et

al., 2014; Lambie et al., 2008; Mullen et al., 2014). Among these issues, confidentiality

stood out as the most frequently addressed ethical concern. This concern often

overlapped with many other ethical concerns facing school counselors (Bodenhorn,

2006).

Ethical issues occur frequently for school counselors. To address these issues

responsibly a school counselor may refer to the ACA (2014) Code of Ethics and the

ASCA (2016) Ethical Standards for School Counselors. However, some ethical issues

are complex and ambiguous. A school counselor may not have a clear idea of how to

proceed. In these cases a school counselor may use an ethical decision-making model

to aid in the decision making process.

Throughout this paper, the STEPS model was used to address ethical issues

faced by Ms. Hannah. As Ms. Hannah went through the nine steps of the decision-

making model, she gained clarity that helped her make a choice. By employing this

model in a practical manner similar to the method demonstrated throughout this article,

school counselors may resolve ethical dilemmas in a consistent and coherent way.

References

American Counseling Association (2014). ACA Code of Ethics. Alexandria, VA: Author.

American School Counselor Association. (2016). ASCA Ethical standards for school

counselors. Alexandria, VA: Author.

Bernes, K. B., & Bardick, A. D. (2007). Conducting adolescent violence risk

assessments: A framework for school counselors. Professional School

Counseling, 10(4), 419-427.

Bodenhorn, N. (2006). Exploratory study of common and challenging ethical dilemmas

experienced by professional school counselors. Professional School Counseling,

10(2), 195-202.

Bryant, J. K. (2009). School counselors and child abuse reporting: A national survey.

Professional School Counseling, 12(5), 333-342.

Cottone, R. R., & Claus, R. E. (2000). Ethical decision-making models: A review of the

literature. Journal of Counseling & Development, 78(3), 275-283.

Davis, K. (2011). Influence of familial spirituality: Implications for school counseling

professionals. Counseling & Values, 55(2), 199-209.

Dobmeier, R. (2011). School counselors support student spirituality through

developmental assets, character education, and ASCA competency indicators.

Professional School Counseling, 14(5), 317-327.

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. (1974), 200 U.S.C. §1232g.

Foster, D., & Black, T. G. (2007). An integral approach to counseling ethics. Counseling

and Values, 51(3), 221-234.

Freeman, S. J., Engels, D. W., & Altekruse, M. K. (2004). Foundations for ethical

standards and codes: The role of moral philosophy and theory in ethics.

Counseling and Values, 48(3), 163-173.

Froeschle, J. G., & Crews, C. (2010). An ethics challenge for school counselors. Journal

of School Counseling, 8(14). Retrieved from http://www.jsc.montana.edu/

articles/v8n14.pdf

Hall, K., Rushing, J., & Beale, A. (2010). Are you a legally literate school counselor?

Journal of School Counseling, 8(22).

Harris, S. E., & Robinson Kurpius, S. E. (2014). Social networking and professional

ethics: Client searches, informed consent, and disclosure. Professional

Psychology: Research and Practice, 45(1), 11-19.

Hicks, J. G. F., Noble, N., Berry, S., Talbert, S., Crews, C., Li, J., & Castillo, Y. (2014).

An ethics challenge for school counselors: Part 2. Journal of School Counseling,

12(1). Retrieved from http://www.jsc.montana.edu/articles/v12n1.pdf

Huey, W. C. (2011). The revised 2010 ethical standards for school counselors. Georgia

School Counselors Association Journal, 18(1), 6-12.

Huss, S. N., Bryant, A., & Mulet, S. (2008). Managing the quagmire of counseling in a

school: Bringing the parents onboard. Professional School Counseling, 11(6),

362-367.

Keim, M. A., & Cobia, D. (2010). Legal and ethical implications of working with minors in

Alabama: Consent and confidentiality. Alabama Counseling Association Journal,

35(2), 28-34.

Kitchener, K. S. (1984). Intuition, critical evaluation, and ethical principles: The

foundation for ethical decisions in counseling psychology. Counseling

Psychologist, 12(3), 43-55.

Lambie, G., Davis, K., & Miller, G. (2008). Spirituality: Implications for professional

school counselors' ethical practice. Counseling and Values, 52(3), 211.

Lambie, G., Ieva, K., Mullen, P., & Hayes, B. (2011). Ego development, ethical decision-

making, and legal and ethical knowledge in school counselors. Journal of Adult

Development, 18(1), 50-59.

Lazovsky, R. (2008). Maintaining confidentiality with minors: Dilemmas of school

counselors. Professional School Counseling, 11(5), 335-346.

Lehr, R., Lehr, A., & Sumarah, J. (2007). Confidentiality and informed consent: School

counsellors' perceptions of ethical practices. Canadian Journal of Counselling,

41(1), 16-30.

Levitt, D. H., Farry, T. J., & Mazzarella, J. R. (2015). Counselor ethical reasoning:

Decision-making practice versus theory. Counseling & Values, 60(1), 84-99.

Magaldi-Dopman, D., & Park-Taylor, J. (2014). Integration amidst separation: Religion,

urban education, and the first amendment. Urban Review: Issues and Ideas in

Public Education, 46(1), 47-62.

Moyer, M. S., Sullivan, J. R., & Growcock, D. (2012). When is it ethical to inform

administrators about student risk-taking behaviors? Perceptions of school

counselors. Professional School Counseling, 15(3), 98-109.

Mullen, P., Griffith, C., Greene, J., & Lambie, G. (2014). Social media and professional

school counselors: Ethical and legal considerations. Journal of School

Counseling, 12(8). Retrieved from http://www.jsc.montana.edu/articles/v12n8.pdf

O'Connell, W. P. (2012). Secondary school administrators' attitudes toward

confidentiality in school Counseling. NASSP Bulletin, 96(4), 350-363.

Pawłowska, B., Potembska, E., Zygo, M., & Olajossy, M. (2015). Prevalence of self-

injury, suicidal ideation, plans and attempts in adolescents aged 13 to 19 years of

age. Polish Journal of Public Health, 125(1), 55-59.

Remley, T., & Herlihy, B. (2016). Ethical, legal, and professional issues in counseling

ed.). Boston: Pearson.

Roberts-Dobie, S., & Donatelle, R. J. (2007). School counselors and student self-injury.

Journal of School Health, 77(5), 257-264.

Schmidt, J. (2008). Counseling in schools: Comprehensive programs of responsive

services for all students (5

ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Sink, C., & Devlin, J. (2011). Student spirituality and school counseling: Issues,

opportunities, and challenges. Counseling and Values, 55(2), 130-148.

Stone, C. B., & Zirkel, P. A. (2010). School counselor advocacy: When law and ethics

may collide. Professional School Counseling, 13(4), 244-247.

Stone, C. (2013). School counseling principles: Ethics and law (3

ed.). Alexandria, VA:

American School Counselor Association.

Trice-Black, S., Kiper Riechel, M. E., & Shillingford, M. A. (2013). School counselors'

constructions of student confidentiality. Journal of School Counseling, 11(12).

Retrieved from http://www.jsc.montana.edu/articles/v11n12.pdf

Walley, C., Grothaus, T., & Craigen, L. (2009). Confusion, crisis, and opportunity:

Professional school counselor’s role in responding to student mental health

issues. Journal of School Counseling, 7(36). Retrieved from

http://www.jsc.montana.edu/articles/v7n36.pdf

Wehrman, J. D., Williams, R., Field, J., & Schroeder, S. D. (2010). Accountability

through documentation: What are best practices for school counselors? Journal

of School Counseling, 8(38). Retrieved from http://www.jsc.montana.edu/

articles/v8n38.pdf