| Course | PSY 650 Ethics |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 2 |
| Paper type | Principle-based analysis |
| Length | About 1,030 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Psychology and Addiction Studies |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for PSY 650 Module 2
Between a Parent's Right to Know and a Teenager's Trust: A Principle-Based Analysis
Student Name
Psychology and Addiction Studies Program, Aspen University
PSY 650: Ethics
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Between a Parent's Right to Know and a Teenager's Trust: A Principle-Based Analysis
Hannah, the counselor at a small Montana group practice whose dilemmas this course follows, has seen Maya, sixteen, for six weeks for depression. Maya's mother consented to treatment, and at the first session Hannah explained to both that she would keep the content of sessions private except in situations of danger, while sharing general progress with the mother. The family and practice are fictional. Last week the mother called, upset. She had learned that Maya had a nineteen-year-old boyfriend and demanded to know everything Maya had said about him. This paper analyzes the dilemma using ethical principles.
Two Levels of Ethical Reasoning
Kitchener (1984) proposed that ethical reasoning in counseling psychology operates at two levels. At the intuitive level, professionals respond quickly based on their ordinary moral sense and experience, often without explicit reasoning. Intuitions are useful but can be mistaken or inconsistent, and they offer no way to resolve disagreements. At the critical-evaluative level, professionals examine their intuitions against ethical rules, such as codes and laws, then against ethical principles and, if needed, against ethical theory. Kitchener identified five principles as the foundation of this level: autonomy, respecting individuals' right to make their own choices; beneficence, contributing to others' welfare; nonmaleficence, avoiding harm; justice, treating people fairly; and fidelity, keeping promises and being trustworthy.
Hannah's first, intuitive reaction was sympathy for the mother: a sixteen-year-old with a nineteen-year-old boyfriend seemed worrying. Her second reaction was protectiveness toward Maya's trust. Kitchener's framework asks her to examine both.
The Professional Frame
The APA Ethics Code expresses similar commitments in its general principles, which are aspirational rather than enforceable: beneficence and nonmaleficence; fidelity and responsibility; integrity; justice; and respect for people's rights and dignity, which includes privacy, confidentiality and self-determination (American Psychological Association [APA], 2017). Its enforceable standards address confidentiality and its limits, including the obligation to discuss those limits at the outset with clients and, where relevant, with parents or guardians.
Weighing Principles
Beauchamp and Childress (2019) argue that principles are binding but not absolute: each holds unless it conflicts with another of equal or greater weight in a particular situation. When principles conflict, the decision maker must specify how each applies in the case and balance them, giving reasons for the weight assigned and choosing the option that infringes the overridden principle as little as possible.
| Principle | Pulls toward | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Autonomy | Keeping Maya's disclosures private | At sixteen, she has a developing capacity for self-determination, and the relationship is hers |
| Fidelity | Keeping Maya's disclosures private | Hannah promised confidentiality, with stated limits, at the start |
| Beneficence | Depends on facts | Maya's welfare may be served by trust in therapy, or by her mother's protection if she is in danger |
| Nonmaleficence | Avoiding harm either way | Disclosure might rupture therapy; silence might leave a danger unaddressed |
| Justice | Fair treatment of both | The mother has legitimate parental responsibility; Maya has a legitimate claim to privacy |
Testing the Intuitions
Hannah's two intuitions pointed in opposite directions, which is common in hard cases. Kitchener's framework treats intuitions as data, not verdicts. The sympathy for the mother reflected beneficence and a protective instinct about a minor's safety. The protectiveness toward Maya reflected fidelity and respect for her developing autonomy. Neither intuition was wrong, but neither could settle the matter alone. Moving to the critical-evaluative level meant asking what the code and law required, which principles were at stake and what facts would change their weight.
Gathering the Facts
The principles' weight depends on facts. Hannah reviewed what Maya had said: the boyfriend was a former classmate's older brother, they had been dating for two months, Maya described the relationship as caring and there was no indication of coercion, abuse or exploitation. Hannah also checked Montana's laws on minors' consent and parental access to records and on mandatory reporting, consulting a colleague and the practice's attorney resource, since an age difference can raise legal reporting questions. She concluded that the information did not trigger a reporting duty.
The Decision
Hannah decided to keep the content of Maya's sessions private, consistent with the agreement made at the start, because autonomy and fidelity weighed heavily and no danger had emerged that would override them. To honor the mother's legitimate concern and parental role, Hannah called her back, acknowledged her worry, reminded her of the agreement and offered a joint session in which Maya could share what she chose about the relationship. She also told the mother what would change the situation: any sign of danger would be shared. In the next session, Hannah told Maya about her mother's call and the offer, and encouraged, but did not require, her to talk with her mother.
The Role of Age and Development
Maya's age matters to every principle in the analysis. At sixteen, she is close to adulthood and capable of much independent judgment, which strengthens the weight of autonomy. She is also still a minor living at home, which gives her mother legitimate responsibilities and, in most states, legal rights regarding treatment. A younger child's confidentiality would weigh less against a parent's request; an adult's would weigh more. Developmental capacity, not age alone, is what the principle of autonomy tracks, and Hannah's six weeks with Maya had shown her to be thoughtful and capable of weighing risks.
What the Decision Costs
The mother was frustrated and said she might end Maya's treatment. That risk is real: a parent who consents can often withdraw consent. Hannah judged that breaking Maya's trust would do more lasting harm, both to this treatment and to Maya's willingness to seek help in future. The joint session offered a way for the mother's concern to be heard without the counselor becoming a channel for her daughter's private disclosures.
Conclusion
Kitchener's framework moved Hannah from competing intuitions to a critical evaluation of five principles. Weighed as Beauchamp and Childress describe, autonomy and fidelity carried the most weight given the facts and the agreement made at the start, while beneficence, nonmaleficence and justice shaped a response that took the mother's concern seriously. The decision kept the promise made to Maya and offered the family a way to talk.
References
American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct (2002, amended effective June 1, 2010, and January 1, 2017). https://www.apa.org/ethics/code
Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of biomedical ethics (8th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Kitchener, K. S. (1984). Intuition, critical evaluation and ethical principles: The foundation for ethical decisions in counseling psychology. The Counseling Psychologist, 12(3), 43-55. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000084123005
PSY 650 Module 2 instructions, in plain terms
The second module of PSY 650 typically asks for an analysis of a dilemma using ethical principles. Treat the Module 2 instructions in your Aspen course as your guide; the counselor and family here are fictional. Explain the principles you use and where they come from. Identify which principles conflict in the case and say what each would have you do. Weigh them rather than simply listing them. Consider relevant law and code standards, which may limit the options. Reach a decision and explain why it honors the principles best. Note what the decision costs. Provide APA 7 references for theoretical and professional sources alike. Gather the facts before weighing principles, since a principle's weight often depends on details such as the client's age or the presence of danger.
How this PSY 650 Module 2 example is built
Hannah, a composite counselor, sees Maya, sixteen, for depression, with her mother's consent. The mother calls demanding to know what Maya has said about a new boyfriend. Kitchener's Counseling Psychologist article supplies the intuitive and critical-evaluative levels and the five principles. Beauchamp and Childress explain how to weigh principles that conflict. The APA Ethics Code's general principles provide the professional frame. A five-row table shows each principle's pull. The decision keeps session content private while arranging a joint meeting, an approach agreed with Maya and her mother at the start of treatment and revisited now. Hannah checks state law on minors' records and reporting before deciding.
Where the marks sit in the PSY 650 Module 2 rubric
Principle-based analyses earn credit for explaining principles accurately, identifying real conflicts among them and weighing them with reasons. This example uses Kitchener's framework, including the intuitive level that often drives first reactions. The table makes conflicts visible. The analysis weighs principles in context, considering Maya's age, the risk involved and the mother's legal role. Law and code standards are considered as limits on the options. The decision is explained with its costs acknowledged, including the mother's frustration and the possibility that she withdraws consent. Checking state law before deciding shows that principles work within legal limits, not above them.
PSY 650 Module 2 help: mistakes that cost marks
Principle-based analyses often list principles without weighing them. Show which ones conflict and how you resolved the conflict. Explain why one principle carries more weight in this situation. Consider law, which may decide some questions for you. Recognize your intuitive reaction and test it against principles. Acknowledge what your decision costs. Agreements about confidentiality made at the start of treatment can prevent many of these conflicts, so mention what should have been agreed if it was not, and how you would put such an agreement in place for future clients. Write down your first, intuitive reaction before analyzing the case; comparing it with your final decision shows where reasoning changed your view.
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 PSY 650 and Psychology and Addiction Studies sample papers
- PSY 650 Module 1: Philosophical Foundations of Ethics
- PSY 650 Module 3: Professional Codes of Ethics
- PSY 650 Module 4: Confidentiality and Privacy
- PSY 650 Module 5: Informed Consent and Competence
- PSY 650 Module 6: Multiple Relationships and Boundaries
- PSY 650 Module 7: Research Ethics
- PSY 650 Module 8: Ethical Decision Making in Practice
- ADC 660 Module 6: Behavioral Couple Therapy
- PAC 302 Module 1: Foundations of Psychological Assessment
- SBS 200 Module 4: Adolescence
- PSY 620 Module 3: Organizational Consultation
PSY 650 Module 2 questions, answered
What does PSY 650 Module 2 usually ask for?
Aspen's PSY 650 covers ethical principles in psychology in this module, so analyzing a dilemma using principles such as autonomy and beneficence is typical. Check your Module 2 prompt.
What are Kitchener's five ethical principles?
Autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, justice and fidelity, which Kitchener proposed as the basis for critical-evaluative ethical reasoning in counseling psychology.
Can parents see their teenager's therapy information?
It depends on state law, the teen's age and agreements made at the start; many counselors agree with families in advance which information will be shared.
Where can I find a free PSY 650 Module 2 sample paper?
The full analysis is on this page: Kitchener's principles, a conflict table and a decision about a parent's request for her teenager's session content.
What is fidelity in ethics?
Keeping promises and being faithful to commitments, including commitments about confidentiality made to clients.