Comparison of Aaca and Apa Ethic Codes Essay Sample free essay sample

Merely as contention and differences emerge invariably with respects to God and His topographic point in society. it would be equaled in the kingdom of reding. This paper will reexamine the Code of Ethics of the American Counseling Association ( ACA ) and the American Association of Christian Counselors ( AACC ) . When reexamining. it is the foundation of each association that prove to represent the most typical difference. The AACC seeks to honour Christ through guidance and supply counsel to the Christian counsellor. while the ACA is committed to the general counsellor at-large and heightening the client’s life while staying focused on a general position of society. There are several other general similarities and differences. Chiefly. that the counsellor should neer do injury to the client. Other similarities that centre around the protection of the client reside in both codifications. Several would include confidentiality. record maintaining. informed consent and the respo nsibility to protect the client and others from physical injury. Although both codifications provide guidelines sing sexual familiarities. it is defined otherwise in the codifications which changes the timelines of rightness for holding a relationship with a client. This paper will analyse the differences and similarities in three countries: confidentiality. go oning instruction and sexual familiarities. Keywords: comparing. ACA. AACC. moralss. codification. counsellor A Comparison of the American Counseling Association and the American Association of Christian Counselors Code of Ethical motives It is apprehensible by detecting the nucleus of our nation’s beliefs to protect the freedoms and rights of others. guidelines would be in topographic point to advance ethical behaviour in counsellors. In 1892 Francis Bellamy penned words that would be etched into the model of our state. â€Å"†¦ one state. indivisible. with autonomy and justness for all. † A desire to guarantee that the people of this state would be treated reasonably and with dignity rings true today. It is besides noteworthy that the contention that came with the add-on of â€Å"under God† to the Pledge of Allegiance by President Eisenhower in 1954 would be in multiple aspects of life. Whether or non the American Association of Christian Counselors ( AACC ) or the American Counseling Association ( ACA ) agree on every guideline. it is of import to observe that th ey both seek to protect those that are wrestling with the challenges of life and frequently easy to be preyed upon or taken advantage of. Section 1 Each organisation may word this primary end of ethical behaviour otherwise. but the nucleus is the same. make no injury. The ACA informs counsellors that â€Å"The primary duty of counsellors is to esteem the self-respect and to advance the public assistance of clients. † ( 2005. p. 4 ) . The AACC introduces its mission of honouring Jesus Christ and advancing integrity in Christian guidance. nevertheless. it affirms that â€Å"†¦the first regulation of professional-ministerial ethical behavior is: make no injury to those served. † ( 2004. pp. 4-6 ) . It is this spirit of making no injury that drives several other general similarities in the codifications. As noted in the AACC foreword. it is apparent that the ACA codifications were referred to while outlining them ( 2004. p. 2 ) . The topics of reding relationship. professional duty. rating. appraisal and reading. supervising preparation and learning have many similarities. Though there are some differences in spec ific countries. it is what drives the codifications foundations that offer the most noticeable discrepancies. For illustration. the ACA views the end-of-life attention for terminally sick patients otherwise. Where the ACA codification provides a more open-ended attack in giving the counsellor an option based on the Torahs applicable to the state of affairs ( 2005. p. 5 ) . the AACC is specific in detailing that â€Å"Christian counsellors refuse to excuse or recommend for active signifiers of mercy killing and assisted self-destruction. † ( 2004. p. 7 ) . These types of differences occur throughout both paperss. Confidentiality is besides detailed in both codifications to protect the client and their information. Both codifications rely upon the fact that the relationship of trust is foundational to the guidance relationship and it is through confidentiality that the counsellor can gain this trust ( ACA. 2005. p. 7 ) . Ethical guidelines in both support the importance of discoursing confidentiality. Specifically. both encourage the procedure of informed consent to discourse revelation . records and confidentiality guidelines to call a few. Clinton and Ohlschlager province. â€Å"Informed consent. a cardinal ethic in reding. is every bit much about revelation of values and beliefs as it is about theory and applied technique. † ( 2002. p. 29 ) . Where techniques and theory may differ. some of the ethical guidelines with which all counsellors should pattern should non alter. Section 2 The chance to inform the client of critical information that can find the success of their guidance is important. Informed consent is besides a clip to discourse non merely confidentiality. but the exclusions to confidentiality. It is the country of confidentiality that will get down the reappraisal of three specific countries ( confidentiality. go oning instruction. sexual familiarities ) to compare with both codifications. Confidentiality is expressed in both codifications to be upheld to the fullest extent of the jurisprudence. Both codifications detail that this confidentiality covers all manners of communications including verbal. written. sound or videotaped ( AACA. 2004. p. 11 ) ( ACA. 2005. pp. 4-8 ) . It is noticed that the ACA guidelines cover all of these methods throughout several subdivisions of their codification. Within the guidelines of confidentiality. one celebrated difference is the add-on of specifically including revelation of contagious. dangerous diseases in th e ACA codification ( 2005. p. 7 ) . Although both codifications enlighten counsellors to the general demands that confidential does non use when revelation is required to protect clients or others from injury or when lawfully required to uncover. merely the ACA inside informations that â€Å"When clients unwrap that they have a disease normally known to be both catching and life threatening. counsellors may be justified in disclosing†¦Ã¢â‚¬  ( 2005. p. 7 ) . This is interesting in visible radiation of high hazard activities that be demonstrated by clients. a revelation of this type can so fall in the class of protecting others from injury. It is besides under the premiss of protecting clients from injury that guidelines sing sexual familiarities are in topographic point. Clients are frequently vulnerable and can be exploited by counsellors doing great injury. The similarities of both codifications with respects to sexual or romantic relationships to current clients is about indistinguishable. it is prohibited. Differences begin with relationships with former clients. The AACC defines and prohibits sexual dealingss with former clients as unethical ( 2004. p. 8 ) . The ACA merely prohibit the relationship with former clients for 5 old ages with guidelines in topographic point to guarantee that the counsellor is clear and non working the client and come ining the relationship ethically ( 2005. p. 5 ) . What is alone is that based on the pos itions of the AACC. the guidelines seem to differ. The AACC is dedicated to honouring God. and must observe that â€Å"Since matrimony is honest before God. the lone exclusion to this regulation against matrimony to a former client. is a instance expecting marriage†¦Ã¢â‚¬  . It besides provides guidelines to guarantee the counsellor is continuing with a sound ethical determination. Alternatively of a 5 twelvemonth waiting period. the AACC proposes a 2 twelvemonth period after the decision of guidance ( 2004. p. 8 ) . Last. another method that can sometimes be overlooked as guaranting that the client is non harmed is that of go oning instruction. The committedness of the counsellor to develop and educate themselves systematically in order to be an effectual competent counsellor is indispensable. Both the ACA and AACC note that counsellors must remain engaged and informed in their field. With respects to ethical behaviour. the AACC displays it as a responsibility of the Christian counsellor. ( 2004. p. 10 ) . Seeking out developing. specialisation and enfranchisement keeps the counsellor aware of informations in their field. It is besides of import to observe that the ACA explains the demand to maintain current â€Å"†¦with diverse populations and sp ecific populations with whom they work. † ( 2005. p. 9 ) . It becomes a reminder that the competent counsellor must ever look for ways to better and pass on with all people. Decision It is with all people in head that this paper began. and it is with all people in head it will stop. The codifications of moralss and guidelines that have been crafted to help the counsellor in making no injury are of great value. Although. there are differences. it is apparent that both codifications are needed to steer the counsellor. One is non independent of the other. The AACC seeks to steer the Christian counsellor and supply them with the tools necessary to go non merely competent counsellors. nevertheless. competent Christian counsellors. The undertaking to intermix the ability to work ethically with a deep devotedness to honour God is non an easy one. It is so a new codification for an emerging profession ( 2004. p. 3 ) . Both codifications seek to see the universe alteration because of their committedness to ethical guidance. The mission of the ACA is to â€Å"†¦enhance the quality of life in society by advancing the development of professional counselors†¦Ã¢â‚¬  ( 2005 ) while the AACC positions moralss in what can be deemed a simpler way†¦love. George Ohlschlager speaks of the â€Å"The Christian Counselor’s Golden Rule† adapted from Romans 13:8-10. The regulations are non long. they are non difficult to gestate. and in a powerful sentence everything is summed up. â€Å"Therefore. to love your clients as Christ loves you is to carry through all your obligations—all your moral-ethical-legal duties—as a Christian counsellor. † ( Clinton. Ohlschlager. 2002. p. 147 ) . Mentions American Counseling Association ( 2005 ) . ACA Code of Ethics. Alexandria. VA: Writer. American Association of Christian Counselors ( AACC ) . ( 2004 ) . AACC codification of moralss: The 2004 concluding codification. Retrieved from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. aacc. net/about-us/code-of-ethics/ Bellamy. F. ( 1892 ) . Pledge of Allegiance. Independence Hall Association. Retrieved from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. ushistory. org/documents/pledge. htm Clinton. T. . A ; Ohlschlager. G. ( 2002 ) . Competent Christian Counseling. Volume One. New York. New york: Crown Publishing Group.