| Course | PAC 415 Healthcare Ethics |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 3 |
| Paper type | Beneficence analysis |
| Length | About 1,011 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Psychology and Addiction Studies |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for PAC 415 Module 3
Doing Good Without Taking Over: Beneficence and Client Goals in Addiction Treatment
Student Name
Psychology and Addiction Studies Program, Aspen University
PAC 415: Healthcare Ethics
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Doing Good Without Taking Over: Beneficence and Client Goals in Addiction Treatment
A composite client at Cedar Hollow Health, a 52-year-old accountant, sought help because his drinking had risen to about six drinks a night and his blood pressure was high. He said clearly that he did not want to stop drinking entirely; he wanted to drink less. His counselor had been trained in a program that treated abstinence as the only acceptable goal. She wanted to do what was best for him, but she also saw that insisting on abstinence might drive him away. This paper examines what beneficence requires in this situation, how it can slide into paternalism, and how evidence and practical wisdom can guide a response that does real good.
What Beneficence Requires
Beneficence is the obligation to act for another person's good: to prevent harm, remove harm and promote well-being (Beauchamp & Childress, 2019). In health care it motivates everything from treatment to advice. But the good of a person is partly defined by that person. Beneficence that ignores the client's own values and goals becomes paternalism, the overriding of a person's choices for their supposed benefit.
Holding both obligations at once, helping and respecting, is the everyday work of a counselor.
The Risk of Paternalism
Insisting on abstinence for a client who does not want it may feel beneficent, but it can produce the opposite of good. The client may leave treatment, conceal his drinking or conclude that help is not available on terms he can accept. Paternalism is sometimes justified, for example when a person lacks capacity or faces immediate serious harm, but this client had capacity and no immediate danger. His goal was not abstinence, and a counselor who can help him reach a safer level of drinking may do more good than one who waits for him to accept abstinence.
What the Evidence Shows
Evidence supports the value of reductions short of abstinence. Using data from alcohol treatment trials, Witkiewitz et al. (2018) found that reductions of one or two levels in the World Health Organization's drinking risk levels during treatment were associated with significant decreases in systolic blood pressure, improvements in liver enzyme levels and better quality of life. The findings suggest that moving from very high risk to a lower risk level brings meaningful health benefits, which makes reduction a legitimate treatment target for some clients.
Motivational Interviewing
Motivational interviewing offers a way to honor both beneficence and autonomy. Miller and Rollnick (2013) describe it as a collaborative, goal-oriented way of talking that draws out and strengthens a person's own reasons for change, built on partnership, acceptance, compassion and evocation. Rather than arguing for abstinence, the counselor explores the client's goals, reflects his concerns about his blood pressure and his family, and helps him set and test a goal he chooses.
Goals and Responses
The table shows how the counselor might respond to different client goals.
| Client's goal | Beneficent response | Paternalistic response |
|---|---|---|
| Cut down to two drinks on weekdays | Help set specific limits, track drinking, review progress | Refuse to work on anything but abstinence |
| Stop entirely | Support abstinence and plan for withdrawal safety | Not applicable |
| Cut down but keeps exceeding limits | Review the goal honestly; discuss whether abstinence might work better | Say I told you so and end treatment |
| Reduce drinking while pregnant partner expects a baby | Explore what the family change means to him | Lecture about responsibility |
Safety Limits
Supporting a reduction goal does not mean supporting any goal. Reduction is less appropriate for people with severe alcohol use disorder, liver disease, pregnancy, a history of alcohol withdrawal seizures or medications that interact dangerously with alcohol. Beneficence requires the counselor to share these concerns honestly, and in some cases to say plainly that the evidence points toward abstinence, while still leaving the decision with the client. The client in this case had high blood pressure but no liver disease or withdrawal history, and his physician agreed to monitor him.
How Goals Change
Goals are not fixed. Many clients who begin with a reduction goal later choose abstinence after discovering how hard moderation is, and some who begin with abstinence settle into lower-risk drinking. A counselor who respects the client's initial goal keeps the relationship alive long enough for such changes to happen. After three months, the accountant was drinking two drinks on most weekday evenings and his blood pressure had fallen; he was considering stopping altogether on weeknights.
Practical Wisdom in the Case
Practical wisdom here meant seeing that the client's goal, not the counselor's training, should shape the plan; weighing the evidence that reduction helps; recognizing the safety limits; and choosing a conversation style that respects the client while caring about his health. It also meant the counselor examining her own assumptions about what recovery must look like.
Monitoring and Honesty
Supporting a reduction goal requires honest monitoring. The counselor and client agreed to track drinks each day on a phone app and to review the numbers every two weeks, alongside blood pressure readings from his physician. They also agreed in advance on what would prompt a conversation about changing the goal: three weeks in a row above his limits or any episode of drinking and driving. Setting these markers early made later conversations less personal and more about the plan they had made together.
The counselor also had to watch her own reactions. When the client exceeded his limits one weekend, she felt the pull to say that moderation was not working. Instead she asked what had happened, and they adjusted the plan together. Beneficence, she learned, includes patience with the pace of someone else's change.
Conclusion
Beneficence asks counselors to act for a client's good, but the good of a person includes his own goals. Insisting on abstinence for a client who wants to cut down risks paternalism that does harm. Evidence shows that reductions in drinking risk bring real health benefits, and motivational interviewing offers a way to help clients pursue their own goals safely. Doing good, in this case, meant helping without taking over.
References
Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of biomedical ethics (8th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (2013). Motivational interviewing: Helping people change (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.
Witkiewitz, K., Kranzler, H. R., Hallgren, K. A., O'Malley, S. S., Falk, D. E., Litten, R. Z., Hasin, D. S., Mann, K. F., & Anton, R. F. (2018). Drinking risk level reductions associated with improvements in physical health and quality of life among individuals with alcohol use disorder. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 42(12), 2453-2465. https://doi.org/10.1111/acer.13897
PAC 415 Module 3 instructions, in plain terms
Beneficence is one of the four principles Aspen's PAC 415 examines through addiction cases, and this module usually asks how it can be honored without overriding clients. The actual Module 3 instructions are released in the course, so this example works through one realistic case. Define beneficence and show how it can slide into paternalism. Choose a case where the client's goal differs from what a professional might prefer. Bring in evidence that bears on whether the client's goal can do real good. Describe a method, such as motivational interviewing, that respects the client while caring for his health. Include the limits: situations where the evidence points strongly one way. End with how goals and plans can change over time.
How the PAC 415 Module 3 example is put together
The paper begins with the accountant's goal and the counselor's abstinence-focused training. It defines beneficence and paternalism and explains when paternalism can be justified. The evidence section reports findings from alcohol treatment trials linking reductions in drinking risk level to lower blood pressure, better liver enzymes and better quality of life. Motivational interviewing is described through its spirit of partnership, acceptance, compassion and evocation. A three-column table shows beneficent and paternalistic responses to four goals. Sections on safety limits, including severe disorder, liver disease and withdrawal history, on monitoring with a drinking app and agreed review points, on how goals change, and on practical wisdom close the paper.
Reading the PAC 415 Module 3 grading rubric
Instructors assessing beneficence papers look for accurate definitions, a real tension, relevant evidence and a response that respects the client while caring for him. This example uses an Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research study of drinking risk reductions, Miller and Rollnick's text on motivational interviewing and Beauchamp and Childress's principles, cited in APA style. Stating the safety limits of reduction goals shows that supporting a client's choice is not the same as agreeing to anything. The monitoring plan with agreed review points makes the approach accountable. Reflecting on the counselor's own training and reactions adds the self-awareness that a practical wisdom course values, and the paper shows how that awareness changed her response in session.
PAC 415 Module 3 help: mistakes that cost marks
A common weakness is presenting abstinence and moderation as a debate of opinions without evidence. Use research on what reductions achieve. Another is supporting any goal the client names without discussing safety; explain when reduction is inadvisable. Describe the conversation, not only the decision, since how a counselor talks shapes whether the client stays. Include a way to monitor progress and a point at which the plan will be revisited. Examine your own assumptions about recovery. Avoid calling paternalism always wrong; explain when it is justified. If you are new to motivational interviewing, a tutor can help you describe its core ideas accurately before you apply them.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More PAC 415 and Psychology and Addiction Studies sample papers
- PAC 415 Module 1: Practical Wisdom in Ethics
- PAC 415 Module 2: Autonomy and Capacity
- PAC 415 Module 4: Justice and Access to Treatment
- PAC 415 Module 5: Confidentiality and Its Limits
- PAC 415 Module 6: Harm Reduction Ethics
- PAC 415 Module 7: A Complex Case, Several Principles
- PAC 415 Module 8: Reflection on Practical Wisdom
- PAC 115 Module 8: Plain-Language Interpretation
- PAC 310 Module 5: Boundaries and Dual Relationships
PAC 415 Module 3 questions, answered
What does PAC 415 Module 3 usually ask for?
Aspen's PAC 415 examines beneficence among the core principles of medical ethics in addiction contexts, so a paper on beneficence and client goals is a typical third assignment. Follow your classroom prompt.
What is paternalism in health care?
Overriding a person's choices for their supposed benefit; it can be justified when a person lacks capacity or faces immediate serious harm, but otherwise conflicts with autonomy.
Is reducing drinking a legitimate treatment goal?
For some clients, yes. Research found that reductions in drinking risk level were associated with lower blood pressure, better liver enzymes and better quality of life.
Where can I find a free PAC 415 Module 3 sample paper?
Read the whole paper above, which weighs beneficence against paternalism for a client who wants to cut down on drinking and includes a table of beneficent and paternalistic responses.
When is paternalism justified in addiction care?
When a person lacks decision-making capacity or faces immediate serious harm; otherwise overriding a capable client's choices conflicts with respect for autonomy.