Ethical research involves ethical choices, usually involving areas of relationship, agreements, intentions, and possible outcomes between parties. In practice, this begins by observing the moral choices people make and the reasons for giving them. Then, moral thinking is responsible for generating the theory of what or what it should be, the basis of moral choice. In the case of practicing hypno-psychotherapist, the main place of ethical considerations relates to what the client can expect - basically the therapist's law and the client's rights.
When discussing the code of ethics below, these ethical principles are the key to moral psychology - psychotherapy practice, and we must recognize that the county's laws take precedence. However, it is important that professional bodies be accountable to their members and provide them with the boundaries of legal and safe practice and ensure the physical and mental safety of their clients.
Broadly speaking, the key ethical principles involved in the practice of hypnotic psychotherapy can be divided into two aspects, one is how the therapist should practice, and the other is how the therapist should treat the client. When considering various professional institutions, including NCHP ["College"], International Professional Hypnosis Society [ISPH], National Hypnotist Association and #39; Ethics and Standards [NGH], National Ethics Committee for Standards - Hypnosis Education and Certification [ NBPES]. We will focus primarily on the guidelines outlined in the NCHP, but other agencies will have other guidelines, especially in the second part of the paper.
NCHP's code of ethics includes 17 points and two terms that outline the consequences of violating ethical guidelines. The consequences of non-compliance with ethical principles are not important for discussing ethical issues and therefore will not be considered further.
The spirit of all these materials is included in the Academy's statement as follows;
"All therapists should approach their work with specific goals to alleviate suffering and promote customer well-being. Therefore, therapists should strive to use the abilities and skills commensurate with their well-trained abilities, as well as the client's abilities. , without prejudice, and fully recognize the value and dignity of everyone." [NCHP, 2001].
Obviously, the purpose of the guide is primarily to help the client, but it is clear that the therapist is protected by the belief that they work within their mandate.
Instead of copying the guidelines of the Academy verbatim, use the above categories [practices/customers] and provide an outline of these guidelines. It should be remembered that the boundaries between the two categories are not always clear, which is a convenient distinction.
Customer's rights are protected by points 2, 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10. They require the therapist to use only the treatments they are familiar with, to maintain confidentiality, to contact third parties when necessary, and to contact the customer. #39;Allow, maintain appropriate personal boundaries [in all areas], and ensure that if they are involved in the research, consult the client and, if so, maintain their anonymity. None of these specific requirements require harm to the customer during the pain relief process.
NGH made it clear that "fearful, shocking, obscene, sexually suggestive, degrading or humiliating advice can never be used with hypnotized clients," ISPH states. "Either hypnosis or other means should be avoided. Make a suggestion, this is a potentially interesting area, because in essence it allows therapists working under the guidance of the university to use "harmful" interventions if they belong to the therapist. In the field of competence, if they are extremely active Leading to the health and lack of pain of the client. In addition to this last point, the Academy's guiding principles seem to ensure that the client protects against unnecessary and conspicuous results wherever possible, and that once approved, these results may Produced.
Two potential areas of concern that may be controversial are points 5 and 10. Point 5 deals with confidentiality and disclosure, and specifically states that "it should be remembered that the therapist is responsible for the entire community, as well as individual customers." Where does the boundary separate customer responsibility from community responsibility? If in the return, the client indicates that they are victims of serious crimes, and if the therapist tries to convince the client to contact the police, can they identify the offender? If the client reveals that he/she is the perpetrator of a serious crime, should the therapist contact the police? If the customer completely suppresses this information, should the therapist notify the customer in both cases?
These concerns may affect the therapist's decision about their own confidentiality limits, which in turn may change their ability to practice.
Point 10 deals with customer maintenance issues. Anonymity and benefits when case-based materials are about to be published. In principle, anonymity can be maintained by replacing the individual's name. However, some details of a case may be enough to make people's identity guessed [the most recent media case involved rape of John Leslie and some Premier League football players, and Dr. David Kelly's case is evidence]. This means that some interesting areas of the case may have to remain unpublished because they will identify individual customers too closely. Then, the dilemma is how we can ensure that the quality of the published work is maintained without unintentionally identifying the customers involved.
The College outlines the ethical practices of hypnotic psychotherapy at points 1, 3, 4, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17. They cover the professionalism of the therapists, their qualifications, as well as the terms, conditions and practices, the need for continuous professional development, the use of hypnosis as a constitution for entertainment, and a guide to requirements related to complaints from therapists or colleagues. .
Basically they are concerned with ensuring that the therapists are qualified to work, assuring their skills, and that their business is done in a way that does not harm the therapist, college or hypnotherapy. . An interesting difference between the college and ISPH is that ISPH will refer to most college-trained therapists as "hypnotists" who are not trained doctors, psychiatrists or clinical psychologists. Why this is important, according to the ISPH guidelines, does not allow tobacco technicians to perform all therapeutic interventions;
"The age return is not carried out by hypnosis technicians. The society believes that age return is a tool for psychotherapists, not a hypnotist, because it may cause traumatic past experiences that technicians are not competent. Age regression by tobacco technicians It may only be carried out in the actual, actual situation of MD, psychiatrist clinical or psychologist." [ISPH, 2003].
In addition to this difference, the college and other institutions mentioned earlier agreed on ethical issues related to psychotherapy practices.
from
The previous ethical requirements outline highlights some areas that may have concerns about these issues. The following discussion will focus on two areas. First, about the discomfort of customers in the process of change, followed by the ethics of returning to practice.
As stated in the College's guidelines, therapists clearly expect to "reduce the pain" and promote "the well-being of their clients". At first glance, this seems to indicate that the process of psychotherapy should be painless or loss of well-being, although this is unlikely to happen in all cases.
In some ways, we may think that venting is an unfortunate consequence of alleviating pain, because the therapist does not always seek to cause pain, although successful treatment may be needed. What is more noteworthy is that it may be necessary to purposely create pain and loss of well-being in the customer to achieve the beneficial results of the customer's request.
For example, a well-known technique for using sex offenders based on behavioral principles is aversive therapy [Marshall, Anderson, & Fernandez, 1999]. This requires the criminals to imagine a scene they are about to offend, and then they either imagine a disgusting exit [for example, when a child is about to approach the school, a pedophile will be asked to imagine putting his hand on their shoulder and turning Look at the police] or be given a disgusting stimuli [electric shock, disgusting smell, etc.]. The idea is that these disgusting outputs are paired with violations, thereby reducing behavior. Similarly, humiliation is used to change the behavior of expressionists.
In principle...
Orignal From: Ethical guide to hypnotherapy
No comments:
Post a Comment