Ethical Theories:

Deontology and Teleology or

Ends versus Means

Deontology
Deos, meaning duty. Deontological theories focus on duties and principles. Emphasis is placed on doing what is right, based on ethical principles, regardless of the outcome. Best known is Emmanuel Kants categorical imperative.

Kantian Ethics
Kants four propositions:
1.
2. 3. 4.

It is our intentions, or will, that makes us morally good. Our will must be motivated by duty. Duty means respecting moral law. The basis of moral law is the categorical imperative:

Determining Whether an Action Conforms to the Categorical Imperative

Four questions to answer: 1. What is my motive for doing this? 2. What is the general principle involved? 3. What is the universal form of this principle? 4. Can this universal principle be made a moral law without defeating its intent?

Applying Kantian Ethics

Should you lie to a parent or partner about where you are going so they will not worry?
1. 2. 3. 4.

I do not want him/her to be worried. I will lie in order to save those who care about me from worrying. Everyone should always lie if the truth would cause their loved ones to worry. No. If this were a universal principle, people would know they would not be told the truth and therefore would always worry, whether there was a reason to or not.
(Continued)

Applying Kantian Ethics

Another way of considering the categorical imperative is: Act so that you treat humanity always as an end and never as a means only. What are some ways we treat others as a means to something we want? How should we treat them in order to show respect for them as an end in themselves?

Proponents and Critics View of Kantian Ethics

What are some arguments that someone who believed in Kantian ethics would give to support this ethical framework? What are some arguments that someone who did not agree with Kantian ethics would make to criticize this ethical framework?

What stage of Kohlbergs moral development do you think Kantian ethics is consistent with?

Teleology
Telos, meaning end or goal. Teleological theories focus on the possible outcomes of an action. Emphasis is placed on doing what will maximize benefits and minimize harm to individuals and to society as a whole.

Best known is John Stuart Mills utilitarianism.

Utilitarian Ethics
Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill

The greatest good (happiness) for the greatest number. Happiness: the presence of pleasure and well-being and the absence of pain or deprivation. Higher order pleasures (i.e. intellectual and aesthetic pleasures, concern for others) are preferable to lower order pleasures (i.e. the gratification of physical appetites). Long-term consequences are more important than short-term consequences. The good of society as a whole is more important than the pleasure of one or a few individuals.

Analyzing Consequences
Predicting the outcome of an action for those involved and society as a whole requires research and sensitivity. The following must be considered: 1. The immediate consequences for everyone involved. 2. The amount and comparative value of the pleasure or harm for everyone involved. 3. The indirect and far-reaching results for society as a whole.

Act-Utilitarianism
Considers the immediate, foreseeable consequences to the individuals involved. Assigns a numbering system to measure the quantity and quality of pleasure/pain for each person. Whichever action has the higher total outcome of happiness is the right choice.
(Continued)

Act-Utilitarianism
Example: You want to go to a movie with a friend instead of preparing your contribution for your study group

Course of action Go to movie

You

Your Friend +8

Study Group (3 people) 5 (3) (more work for them) +5 (3) (less work for them)

Total

enjoy show

+5 likes you

13 15 = 2 10 +15 = +5

Prepare for 5 study (Wont feel group guilty)

5 (go with someone else)

Rule-Utilitarianism
Formulates rules based on long-range consequences to society, rather than to individuals.

Example: People must honour their agreed-upon obligations (i.e., to study group) because otherwise people could not trust each other and they could not work together.

Proponents and Critics View of Utilitarian Ethics

What are some arguments that someone who believed in utilitarian ethics would give to support this ethical framework? What are some arguments that someone who did not agree with utilitarian ethics would make to criticize this ethical framework? Do you think this theory is closer to Kohlbergs theory of moral development or Gilligans? Why?

Combining Ethical Approaches

Ethics of Purpose Ethics of Principles Ethics of Consequences

These can be combined in the following ways, to make ethical decisions:

1. We should pursue our purpose unless it treats persons only as means or unless the consequences cause more harm than good.

(Continued)

Combining Ethical Approaches

2. We should act on principle unless it will cause more harm than good or unless it contradicts our purpose. 3. We should do what causes the most good and least harm for all concerned unless it means treating some persons only as means and committing acts which cannot be universalized or unless it destroys our potential to achieve our purpose.

 Introduced to the first of 10 BACB Guidelines for

responsible conduct of a behaviour analyst.

The full task list and guidelines can be found by

going to http://www.BACB.com/consum_frame.html .

 Along with the ONTABA standards these

guidelines will be used to review specific ethical conduct of behaviour analysts In your text book a variety of cases are presented with questions for your review. As you read each chapter and each case you should keep in mind any of your own similar dilemmas and how each situation should be handled ethically and in accordance with these guidelines

 This first guideline is concerned with how a

behaviour analyst should behave in their professional lives.

 By the end of this lesson you should be able to:

Provide a summary of overall responsible conduct List the 8 tasks under this guideline Respond to case examples and questions regarding

general responsible conduct

 As a profession we have a short history

Original behaviour analysts of 60s worked

ethically They used their own conscience and common sense to develop new treatments. These original researchers were often experimental psychologists who replicated animal lab procedures with individuals that were neglected by other service professionals. It was not until later on that questionable practices began that the ethics of these professionals was questioned.

 Guideline 1.01 emphasizes our roots in the

science of behaviour (Skinner, 1953) and reminds us that our clinical decision making must be tied to this science.

BACB Guideline 1.0

1.0 Responsible conduct for a behaviour analyst
The Behaviour Analyst maintains the high standards of professional behaviour of the professional organization.

 The BACB makes a distinction between

professional behaviour and private, everyday behaviour. While working with clients it is understood that the behaviour analyst will work at maintaining values such as honesty, reliability, integrity, confidentiality, trustworthiness, etc. Representing the profession as a whole

1.01 Reliance on Scientific Knowledge

The Behaviour Analyst relies on scientifically and professionally derived knowledge when making scientific or professional judgments in human service provision, or when engaging in scholarly or professional endeavors.

 The basis of our practice is the reliance on

scientific knowledge. When assessing behaviour or designing an intervention plan, the behaviour analyst is expected to utilize objective and systematic observation and data collection systems. It is essential that we maintain the highest standard of integrity in describing the methodology and results of published research.

1.02 Competence and Professional Development The behaviour analyst remains proficient in professional practice and the performance of professional functions by reading the appropriate literature, attending conferences and conventions, participating in workshops, and/or obtaining Behaviour Analyst Board Certification.

1.03 Competence Behaviour analysts provide services to, teach, and conduct research only within the boundaries of their competence, based on their education, training, supervised experience, or appropriate professional experience.
Behaviour analysts provide services, teach, or

conduct research in new area or involving new techniques only after first undertaking appropriate study, training, supervision, and/or consultation from persons who are competent in those areas or techniques.

1.04 Professional Development Behaviour analysts who engage in assessment, therapy, teaching, research, organizational consulting, or other professional activities maintain a reasonable level of awareness of current scientific and professional information in their fields of activity, and undertake ongoing efforts to maintain competence in the skills they use.

 An important commitment a professional should

make is to attend the international and/or the ONTABA conference annually. As the field is evolving rapidly it is important and necessary to stay current with the latest developments. It may also be beneficial to subscribe to journals containing articles relevant to the specific area of practice or research that interests the behaviour analyst if their employer does not already do so

1.05 Integrity
The behaviour analysts behaviour conforms to the

legal and moral codes of the social and professional community of which they behaviour analyst is a member. The activity of a behaviour analyst falls under these guidelines only if the activity is part of his/her workrelated functions or the activity is behaviour analytic in nature If behaviour analysts ethical responsibilities conflict with law, behaviour analysts make known their commitment to these guidelines and take steps to resolve the conflict in a responsible manner in

 Aware of legal issues pertaining to this type of

work
Aware of the moral and social values of the

particular community within which they are working If the law conflicts with these guidelines, of course they must uphold the law first and foremost.

1.06 Professional and scientific relationships

Behaviour analysts provide behavioural, diagnostic, therapeutic,

teaching, research, supervisory, consultative, or other behaviour analytic services only in the context of a defined, remunerated professional or scientific relationship or role
When behaviour analysts provide assessment, evaluation, treatment,

counseling, supervision, teaching, consultation, research, or other behaviour analytic services to an individual, a group, or an organization, they use language that is fully understandable to the recipient of those services. They provide appropriate information prior to service delivery about the nature of such services and appropriate information later about the results and conclusions
Where differences of age, gender, race, ethnicity, national origin,

religion, sexual orientation, disability, language, or socioeconomic status significantly affect behaviour analysts work concerning particular individuals or groups, behaviour analysts obtain the training, experience, consultation, or supervision necessary to ensure the competence of their services, or they make appropriate referral.

 In their work related activities, behaviour analysts do not

engage in discrimination against individuals or groups based on age, gender, race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, or any basis prescribed by law.
Behaviour analysts do not knowingly engage in behaviour

that is harassing or demeaning to persons with whom they interact in their work based on factors such as those persons age, gender, race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status in accordance with law
Behaviour analysts recognize that their personal problems

and conflicts may interfere with their effectiveness. Behaviour analysts refrain from providing services when their personal circumstances may compromise delivering services to the best of their abilities.

1.07 Dual Relationships

In many communities and situations, it may not be feasible

or reasonable for behaviour analysts to avoid social or other non-professional contacts with persons such as clients, students, supervisees, or research participants. Behaviour analysts must always be sensitive to the potential harmful effects of other contacts on their work and on those persons with whom they deal
A behaviour analyst refrains from entering into or

promising a personal scientific, professional, financial, or other relationship with any such person if it appears likely that such a relationship reasonably might impair the behaviour analysts objectivity or otherwise interfere with the behaviour analysts ability to effectively perform his or her functions as a behaviour analyst, or might harm or exploit the other party.

 If a behaviour analyst finds that, due to unforeseen

factors, a potentially harmful multiple relationship has arisen (i.e., one in which the reasonable possibility of conflict of interest or undue influence is present), the behaviour analyst attempts to resolve it with due regard for the best interests of the affected person and maximal compliance with these Guidelines

 It is best to avoid dual relationships.

Social contact with clients is to be avoided

Social interactions may cloud objectivity. It is important to always assess the potential that

getting involved in a dual relationship may in fact cause more harm than value and in these cases the client should be referred to another professional.

1.08 Exploitative Relationships

Behaviour analysts do not exploit persons over whom they

have supervisory, evaluative, or other authority such as students, supervisees, employees, research participants, and clients.
Behaviour analysts do not engage in sexual relationships

with clients, students, or supervisees in training over whom the behaviour analyst has evaluative or direct authority, because such relationships easily impair judgment or become exploitative.
Behaviour analysts are cautioned against bartering with

clients because it is often

clinically contraindicated, and prone to formation of an exploitative relationship.