3-2 Milestone Two Case Study Analysis Outline

.docx

School

Southern New Hampshire University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

560

Subject

Psychology

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

15

Uploaded by MajorKingfisherMaster799

Report
Case 13-7 Billy Berzerk Gloria Goodrum Southern New Hampshire University PSY 570: Ethical Practice in Psychology Dr. Nicole S. Donato, PhD May 6, 2023
Alleged Axe Murderer, Billy Berzerk Case Study Abstract Billy Berzerk was taken into custody on the grounds that he may have used an axe to murder his family of four. When Mr. Berzerk's lawyer heard that his client claimed to have heard voices urging him to murder his family, he contacted psychologist Cruddy D. Cider to assess him; the goal was to use this information to argue that his client was insane. Dr. Cider's evidence during Mr. Berzerk's trial had ethical repercussions because she didn't know the correct state statutes. Dr. Cider probably influenced the jury's verdict because of his personal assertion. He might have increased Mr. Berzerk's chances of being able to file an appeal and possibly have it granted by incorporating his personal assertion into his expert testimony. Dr. Cider was unaware that the legal system, not psychology, decides whether someone is insane. Case Study Description Billy Berzerk was scheduled to go on trial for the axe murder of his family of four, according to Koocher & Keith-Spiegel (2016, p.436) in Ethics in Psychology and Mental Health Professions. His counsel recruited Cruddy D. Cider, Psy.D. to undertake an expert psychological evaluation of criminal responsibility because he intended to use the insanity defense. According to the evaluation, Mr. Berzerk suffered from a serious mental problem, had poor impulse control, a lot of uncontrolled rage, and frequently expressed paranoid ideas.In particular, Mr. Berzerk had regularly received warnings through his auditory hallucinations that alien entities had inhabited
the bodies of his family and were about to invade Earth. All of these conclusions were referenced by Dr. Cider, who declared in his report's conclusion that Mr. Berzerk was obviously mad at the time of the offense. In this scenario, Dr. Cruddy D. Cider is the most important individual. Dr. Cider did not receive any information from Mr. Berzerk's lawyer throughout their interactions with each other that only his expert opinion would be accepted. A personal assessment of the defendant's actions cannot be included in an expert's testimony. "No expert witness testifying with respect to the mental state or condition of a defendant in a criminal case may state an opinion or draw an inference as to whether the defendant did or did not have the mental state or condition constituting an element of the crime charged or a defense thereto," according to the Department of Justice (2020). Additionally, Dr. Cider is only allowed to express his opinions inasmuch as they relate to Mr. Berzerk's actions and impulsivity, as well as any other relevant professional commentary. The judge or jury will determine whether Mr. Berzerk committed his crimes while insane and whether or not he is guilty. The Ethical Conflict Dr. Cider's competence and ignorance of state regulations and laws constitute the case's main ethical dilemma. According to Koocher and Keith-Spiegel (2016), "Today's standard for proving legal insanity differs significantly from state to state, necessitating that those providing expert testimony concentrate their opinions on the elements of the specific statutes in question." During the trial when on the stand, it may have been that Dr. Cider was asked his opinion, which
is, again, an ethical conflict. Even seasoned forensic mental health practitioners have occasionally been found making improper claims when testifying (Koocher & Keith-Spiegel, 2016).Whether that was a prosecution or Mr. Berzerk's attorney's inquiry of opinion, it belonged nowhere in this trial. Additionally, Dr. Cider is a qualified individual who can vouch for Mr. Berzerk's mental competence but not for the criminality of his past, present, or probable future activities. A forensic psychologist would be more qualified in that situation. This relates to Dr. Cider's ignorance of the law and criminal activities. It would be essential to alter policies and regulations regarding psychologists involved in criminal cases in order to address these ethical problems. Even if it takes two psychologists to get their professional conclusion—a clinical psychologist to evaluate the person, followed by a forensic psychologist to evaluate the criminal aspects of the case. The APA Code of Ethics Principles The APA Code of Ethics Principles All psychologists must adhere to certain principles, which are standards. These guidelines have been put in place to guarantee the welfare and best interests of clients and coworkers. The five guidelines that each psychologist should keep in mind are as follows: Beneficence and nonmaleficence comprise Principle A . "Psychologists take care to do no damage and endeavor to benefit individuals with whom they interact. Psychologists work to protect the rights and welfare of other impacted people as well as those with whom they contact professionally. (APA, 2017). Fidelity and accountability make up Principle B . "Psychologists build trusting relationships with the people they work with. They are conscious of their ethical and professional obligations
to society and the particular communities in which they work. Psychologists adhere to ethical norms of conduct, define their roles and responsibilities in the field, take responsibility for their actions, and work to resolve conflicts of interest that could result in abuse or injury. (APA, 2017). Integrity is principle C . "Psychologists work to further precision, honesty, and truthfulness in psychology's study, instruction, and practice. In these actions, psychologists do not steal, cheat, commit fraud, use deception, or purposefully misrepresent the truth. Psychologists try to avoid making rash or ambiguous commitments by keeping their word. (APA, 2017). Justice is the third principle . "Psychologists understand that fairness and justice entitle all people to equal quality in the processes, procedures, and services being provided by psychologists as well as access to and benefit from psychology's contributions. Psychologists use good judgment and measures to prevent their potential biases, the limitations of their field, and other issues. There expertise's limitations and level of competency "do not encourage or result in unfair practices" (APA, 2017). People's rights and dignity are respected according to principle E . "Psychologists recognize the worth and dignity of every person as well as their right to self-determination, privacy, and secrecy. When working with members of such groups, psychologists take into account these factors and are aware of and respectful of differences based on age, gender, gender identity, race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, language, and socioeconomic status. (APA, 2017). Dr. Cruddy D. Cider in Billy Berzerk's case wanted to help his client, but his professional testimony made it difficult for innocence to prevail. The use of his personal statement at the
conclusion of his testimony might have been more detrimental to his client than beneficial to Mr. Berzerk. Because of his ignorance of the law and state statutes, Dr. Cider lacked the expertise to effectively express his opinions on forensic psychology issues, which is a violation of Principle A. Second, Mr. Cider's inability to promote the veracity of his work and evaluation was a breach of Principle C, integrity, due to his lack of expertise in the field of forensic psychology. The standards of the APA Code of Ethics The standards outlined in the APA Code of Ethics serve as further directives and clarifications of the ideas put forth. The 10 principles address all facets of psychological work, including ethical and therapeutic concerns. The following ten principles are listed in the Code of Ethics: Putting ethical issues to rest . This guideline is applicable to situations where psychologists must address misuses of their work, difficulties with legal requirements, or disputes with other governmental organizations. Psychologists should promptly disclose any violations of their conduct to the appropriate parties or ethics committees. Competence . This guideline covers issues including boundaries that should be established, professional obligations that should be met, and personal problems and what to do. A psychologist should seek the help of another expert if they feel they are unable to assist a particular person. relating to people. This is the norm to be used when questions about a client's or psychologist's behavior are involved. The appropriate supervisors or committees should be alerted when a psychologist or client acts in a less-than-professional manner. Discrimination, harassment, multiple partnerships, conflicts of interest, and exploitative relationships are a few examples of these circumstances.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help