| Course | PSY 650 Ethics |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 8 |
| Paper type | Decision-making application |
| Length | About 1,068 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 8
A Subpoena Arrives: Applying an Ethical Decision-Making Model in Practice
Student Name
Psychology and Addiction Studies Program, Aspen University
PSY 650: Ethics
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
A Subpoena Arrives: Applying an Ethical Decision-Making Model in Practice
Dale, the client whose angry remark Hannah assessed in an earlier module, has continued in counseling for depression after his divorce. Like Hannah and her Montana practice, he is invented for this course. In March, Hannah received a subpoena from the attorney representing Dale's former wife in a custody dispute, requesting all of Dale's counseling records. Because the document looked official, her first impulse was to send the file; her second was to refuse outright to protect Dale. This paper applies an ethical decision-making model to the situation.
What Decision-Making Models Share
Cottone and Claus (2000) reviewed published ethical decision-making models in counseling. They found many models, some derived from practice, some from philosophy and some designed for particular specialties, but few that had been tested empirically. Most shared a common sequence: identify the problem; consult the relevant codes, laws and guidelines; determine the nature and dimensions of the dilemma; generate possible courses of action; consider the consequences of each; choose and carry out an action; and evaluate the outcome. They also noted that models varied in how much attention they gave to the decision maker's own values, to consultation and to context. Hannah used the common sequence, adding Kitchener's attention to intuition and Beauchamp and Childress's principles.
Examining the First Reaction
Kitchener (1984) distinguished the intuitive level of ethical reasoning from the critical-evaluative level. Hannah's two intuitions, to comply and to refuse, were both understandable and both incomplete. Compliance would ignore Dale's privilege and trust; refusal would ignore a legal document that requires a response. Kitchener's framework treats such intuitions as starting points to be tested against rules and principles.
Applying the Model
| Step | Hannah's actions |
|---|---|
| Identify the problem | A legal request for records conflicts with Dale's confidentiality; the records contain sensitive material about his anger and his children |
| Consult codes and law | The code allows release without consent only where law requires or allows it; Hannah checks state law on privilege and subpoenas with the practice's liability insurer's legal advice line |
| Determine the dilemma | Legal: a subpoena is not a court order, and privileged records generally require client consent or a court order; ethical: privacy against the court's legitimate interest in the children's welfare |
| Generate options | Release all records; refuse to respond; contact Dale and his attorney, assert privilege and await consent or a court order; seek to limit any release to a summary |
| Consider consequences | Full release would breach trust and expose material beyond what the court needs; ignoring the subpoena could bring legal penalties; asserting privilege protects Dale while respecting the process |
| Choose and act | Notify Dale; respond to the attorney asserting privilege; release nothing without Dale's written consent or a court order; if ordered, seek to limit release to what is necessary |
| Evaluate | Review the outcome and whether the practice's procedures for subpoenas need updating |
Why Consultation Mattered
Hannah is not a lawyer, and the distinction between a subpoena and a court order, and the rules on privilege, differ by state. Consultation with the legal advice line supplied knowledge she lacked; consultation with a colleague tested her reasoning. Cottone and Claus noted that many decision models include consultation as a step, and in this case it changed the outcome: without it, Hannah might have sent the full file, believing the subpoena required it.
The Client's Role
Dale was not a bystander to the decision. Hannah explained his options, encouraged him to speak with his own attorney and left the choice of what to authorize with him. Involving the client in decisions about his own information follows from respect for autonomy and also builds trust: Dale later said that the way Hannah handled the subpoena made him more willing to be open in sessions, not less.
Weighing the Principles
Beauchamp and Childress (2019) describe principles that must be balanced when they conflict. Respect for autonomy supports Dale's control over his own information. Nonmaleficence warns against releasing material, such as his angry remark, that could be misread out of context and harm him and possibly his children. Justice recognizes the court's legitimate role in deciding custody and the children's interests. The chosen course respects all three: it does not obstruct the legal process, it keeps decisions about release with Dale or a judge and it seeks to limit any release to what the court actually needs.
What Happened
Hannah called Dale, explained the subpoena and his options and suggested he speak with his attorney. She sent a letter to the requesting attorney stating that the records were privileged and would not be released without Dale's written authorization or a court order. Dale's attorney later negotiated that Hannah would provide a brief summary of attendance and general progress, which Dale authorized in writing. No full records were released. Hannah documented each contact, her consultation with the legal advice line and her reasoning.
What Hannah Would Do Differently
Looking back, Hannah identified two improvements. She had no written procedure for subpoenas, so she lost a day working out what to do; the practice has since adopted one, including whom to call and what to tell the client. And her intake form mentioned that records could be subject to court orders but did not explain the difference between a subpoena and an order, which might have helped Dale understand the situation more quickly. Both changes illustrate the last step of the decision model, evaluation, which turns one case into better practice for the next.
Reflection
The course has changed how Hannah, and the writer of this paper, approach decisions. Earlier modules showed that first reactions can mislead, whether sympathy for a parent demanding a teenager's secrets or alarm at a client's angry words. They showed that codes set a frame but leave much to judgment, that consent is a process, that boundaries in small communities call for reasoning rather than reflex and that research ethics grew from failures of conscience. The decision model used here gathers those lessons into a habit: pause, consult, involve the client, weigh principles, act and document.
Conclusion
Cottone and Claus's review identified the steps most decision models share, Kitchener explained why first intuitions must be tested and Beauchamp and Childress's principles helped weigh competing claims. Applied to a subpoena, the model led Hannah to respond lawfully while protecting Dale's privilege, to involve him in every decision and to release only what he authorized.
References
Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of biomedical ethics (8th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Cottone, R. R., & Claus, R. E. (2000). Ethical decision-making models: A review of the literature. Journal of Counseling & Development, 78(3), 275-283. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.2000.tb01908.x
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
Reading the PSY 650 Module 8 assignment instructions
The final module of PSY 650 typically centers on putting a decision-making model to work on a hard case and on reflecting about your own ethical growth. Use the Module 8 instructions in your Aspen course; the client here is invented. Describe what decision-making models share and choose or build one. Apply it step by step to a case with real tension between obligations. Keep legal duties and ethical duties apart, since a legal permission does not settle what ethics advises. Consult and document. Explain the decision and its costs. Reflect on how the course has shaped your reasoning. Cite each source in APA 7, and connect your model to earlier modules. Choose a case where obligations genuinely conflict, so the model has real work to do.
How the PSY 650 Module 8 example is put together
Hannah, the composite counselor, receives a subpoena from the attorney for her client Dale's former wife, seeking his records for a custody case. Cottone and Claus's Journal of Counseling and Development review supplies the common steps of decision models. Kitchener's Counseling Psychologist article explains why Hannah should examine her first impulse. Beauchamp and Childress's principles frame the weighing of privacy, harm and justice. A seven-row table moves from identifying the problem to evaluating the outcome. Hannah contacts Dale, asserts privilege, declines to release records without his consent or a court order and documents each step. Dale's attorney later negotiates a limited summary, which Dale authorizes in writing.
Reading the PSY 650 Module 8 grading rubric
Decision-making papers earn credit for a clear model, faithful step-by-step application and a reasoned decision. This example draws its model from a review of the literature rather than inventing steps. Each step is applied to the case with specific actions. The legal distinction between a subpoena and a court order is handled correctly, with consultation that changed the outcome. Principles are weighed rather than listed, and the client is involved at every step. The reflection connects the decision to the course's earlier modules, showing integration rather than a summary of topics. The decision protects the client without obstructing the court, which is the balance such cases demand.
Common PSY 650 Module 8 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Decision-making papers often list steps without showing what happens at each. Apply each step to the case with specific actions. Distinguish law from ethics: a subpoena is not the same as a court order, and many states treat them differently. Consult a colleague and, for legal questions, an attorney or professional liability resource. Involve the client. Document as you go. Reflect honestly on how your reasoning has changed, including any first reactions you now see differently. Choose a model you would actually use under time pressure; a model with twelve steps that you cannot remember when the phone rings will not help. Keep a written procedure for subpoenas in your practice, since they arrive without warning and often with short deadlines.
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 2: Ethical Principles in Psychology
- 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
- PAC 201 Module 7: Moral Development
- ADC 660 Module 5: Brief Family Interventions
- PAC 302 Module 2: Scores, Norms and Statistics
- PAC 240 Module 7: Relapse Prevention
PSY 650 Module 8 questions, answered
What does PSY 650 Module 8 usually ask for?
Aspen's PSY 650 ends with ethical decision making in practice in this module, so applying a decision model to a complex case and reflecting on your approach is typical. Consult your Module 8 prompt.
What steps do ethical decision-making models share?
Cottone and Claus found most models include identifying the problem, consulting codes and law, generating options, considering consequences, choosing, acting and evaluating.
Must a counselor release records when subpoenaed?
Not automatically. A subpoena requires a response, but records are often protected by privilege; many states require client consent or a court order before release.
Where can I find a free PSY 650 Module 8 sample paper?
This page has the full paper: a decision model drawn from the literature, applied step by step to a subpoena, with a reflection.
Why examine an intuitive ethical reaction?
Kitchener explains that intuitions can be mistaken or inconsistent; critical evaluation against rules and principles tests whether the first reaction is right.