Military health specialists face a lot of dilemmas that comes as a result of the dual identity that exist and have to bear with both as a medical expert and a military officer. Many are the times when military health specialists are required to meet and bring to equilibrium conflicting responsibilities between their patients and the entire department in which they function. These upheavals, challenges, and turbulences come as a result of the voluminous issues that are connected to military health systems. Considering their position, they are required to multitask in order to meet their set goals and objectives. Many are the instances when they experience miscellaneous agency dilemmas when their obligations bombard with their more custom responsibilities as health specialists, physicians as well as social workers. A good example is when a clinician is in a battle milieu; his thinking of the devastated service members’ health as well as welfare would best be attended by a restricted obligation aside from the battle front with effective actuality that the knowledge and skills of these service members are necessary toward the accomplishment of an imminent military goal.
As psychotherapists, medical experts want to organize a therapeutic withdrawal; the clinician appreciated the all-embracing task and the need to rage the welfares of an individual with unit and also the domestic securities. Additionally, the clinicians are arrayed as part of the Army. The extent that a clinician is sandwiched within a combat unit may be very problematic for that clinician to remain focused on professional ethical responsibilities to individual patients. This paper seeks to explore an aspect of moral dilemma linked to the mixed-agency status of military mental health social workers – skirmishes between ethical responsibilities and legitimate statues. Despite the fact that military health social workers can traverse seeming absurdity between daily regulations and ethics, every clinician is sure to encounter circumstances in which ethical and legal responsibilities seem to demand antagonizing obligations (Morgan et al., 2017).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Conflicts between Ethics and Law
Many are the times when military providers unearth and exhume understated incompatibilities as well as clear cut outs between professional ethical standards and several DOD statues. For example, mental health workers might at one point or the other come across ethical legal conflicts in different circumstances which may include confidentiality, multiple relationships, informed consent, and interrogation of prisoners as well as reiterating to client admission of non-heterosexual alignment. In the case of Vietnam, military health providers were faced by codified organizational expectations which a few people looked at the incident as the violation of the most primary ethical tenants of military health providers serving the welfare of the person. Particularly, the Vietnam camps stood against the policies that were addressed by the medical departments as well as the unswerving orders from the superiors, to restrain soldier pathology to maintain them me theater; the Vietnam camps believed the soldier’s psychiatric ultimate interest were scientifically deemed to serve management individual interests.
Despite the fact that clinicians in many cases oft times come across collisions, dissimilarities and tensions between the legal sector and the career ethics, dissimilarities solely do not encompass conflicts. From the latest guide by the American psychological association on the issue of conflicts sandwiched in law and ethics, the publication put more emphasis that many professionals would bump into often tensions and dissimilarities between ethical and legal necessities. For example, in given occasions a law may enforce the necessities that a consciences code does not make any impact (Hoyt, 2017).
For the fact that disagreements, differences, and conflicts exhibit in different contexts of health professionals, there is a big question on how the ethics codes under these carriers address such differences. The conflicts were addressed through the establishment of Associations, such Associations include:
American Medical Association
Standard moral values and legal obligations are oft times closely linked, however, ethical obligations normally surpasses legal principles. In a number of cases, the law dictates immoralities. Generally, when health providers think a law in not fair, they ought to work to dismiss or change the law. In exceptional situations of unjust laws, moral obligations ought to succeed legal principles.
American Psychological Association
If the psychologist’s ethical accountability disagrees with the rules and regulations, then psychologists publicize their commitment to the ethics code and take actions to give a resolution to the disagreement. If at one point or the other, the identified conflict cannot be resolved through the established approaches, then psychologists have no other option than to adhere to the necessities of the law or the legal entity that is on jurisdiction
American Psychiatric Association
It would appear substantial that a psychiatric that bends the law is morally unfitted to implement their profession. When the act of violating the laws proportionally bears his career, obviously this would be the case. Nevertheless, in other circumstances, violating the law which encompasses the right to protest social injustices might not have an impact on either the frame of reference of the psychiatrist or the potentials of the specific psychiatrist to look into the welfare of their patient morally and in an appropriate manner, conceivable that a person could infringe a law without being remorseful of professionally unethical conduct. It should be noted that health providers loose not even a single right of citizenship when they indulge in the medical profession (Smith-Osborne & Jani, 2014).
Association of social workers
Chances are that there might be instances where the ethical responsibilities of social workers disagree with the policies drafted by the Agency or the necessary rules and regulations. When such disagreements arise, social workers must take it to their hands and make an effort to see to it that a resolution has been drafted in a way that does not disagree with the land values, principles, and the set standards expressed in this code. If the drafted resolution appears unreasonable, then it is upon the responsibility of social workers to look for proper consultations prior to making any decision.
It is of ultimate importance that every code brings into recognition and realizes that ethical principles and standards may at one point or the other be contrasting with the prevalent federal laws and statutes. Of importance is that every ethical code lays a good platform for the health professionals to come up with a resolution of the disagreement that emerge in ethics in the most effective modus. Military health providers are given a chance to trail on established legitimate statues or to bend a law as a matter of sense of right and wrong when a law is thought unethical or unjust. Every code seems to realize that the necessities of rules and regulations set by the government are to be immoral in some occasions while the statutes are often times bent due to the fact that they are unethical and unfair. Therefore, experts who spoil the decree as a channel to observing to a bigger ethical level ought to be alacritous to assent the aftermaths of their choices (Devine, 2006).
Recently, physicians who stood and fought for humanitarian rights launched a set of rules and regulations that addressed moral legal differences in military environments. These rules and regulations spot that military environments create jeopardies for mixed-Agency tension. Military clinicians may intentionally or deliberately execute numerous tasks to aggravate the catastrophe when morals and decrees bombard in the progress of their healthcare rehearsal. The first thing is that health professionals may lack the knowledge of their careers moral code as well as the entire law. Secondly, professions might align with the rules and regulations in every circumstance and without imposing a single question. Lastly, military clinicians may implement a “covertness approach” in which they ignore and suspend the DOD or legal necessities in favor of total adherence in the specialized codes of ethics. This plan of action in most cases establishes redundant divergence between moral standards and laws and might also fashion adequate legal exposure to the medical staff.
A Case of an Ethical Legal Conflict
This part offers an instance that exhibit a situations in which a military officer and a mental health professional might find it authentic and reasonable to conflict between moral responsibilities and legal necessities. The example encompasses and combination of a number of cases that are similar to the first author.
LT Jones an Aircraft carrier and a psychologist commenced psychotherapy with a demeaned military officer as well as a cadaver in the health care department. The officer being examined is self-proclaimed and seems to scuffle with mood difficulties, which comes as a result of childhood sexual abuse as well as bulimia. She was bereaved by hers mother several days ago, hastening her quest for treatment. After therapy is implemented on the case of the demeaned soldier which is done for three months some improvement is realized; the soldier’s mood goes back to normal and she seldom indulges in bingeing and eradication. When the demeaned officer is raised up the ranks and put in a garrison that requires a security clearance which only LT Jones can authenticate, then there is no other way than to submit Jones in order to provide a detailed report on the health status for her. It must not be forgotten that in this instance, LT Jones is the only health mental specialist. Jones requests for an increase in the deadline and security clearing procedure. The delay was instigated by the fact that Jones wanted his client to be assessed by another distinct mental specialist. However, when the ship returns to the base camp, the executive officer declines the request. Later long after the client’s clearance security is being prepared the executive officer comes across the assessment drafted by Jones In the office. The assessment encompassed the prerequisite developmental as well as the psychosexual background and the analyses of huge depressions in remission and bulimia nervosa. From the psychological assessment and evaluation, the executive officer decided to withhold the security clearance. Due to this act, the officer who was on psychotherapy felt a lot of betrayal from her psychologist and got a bad impression on the entire military squad, why? They would have a clue of her history, not just a clue but a negative look at her, this made her feel humiliated and dismayed that her colleagues will know her details as well as her emotional difficulties, however none of the above affected her performance. When LT Jones realized that the executive officer read her assessment, she is worried that she might have violated some of the set standard codes in her area of expertise which encompass, the misuse of psychology as a profession; preventing harm; multiple relationships; informed consent; upholding confidentiality; and minimizing incursions on discretion.
The report and assessment made by Jones might lead to an ethical legal conflict if she concludes the executive officer in this case does not have a legal right to require a speedy security clearance assessment and go through that assessment in detail. Furthermore, the standard assessment required disclosure of private information which include the officer’s relationship background and fight with bulimia, which in this case are not prominent to the security question. More of that, there is the case of engaging in several roles with the client which in this incident is the psychotherapist and management forensic assessor- which the psychologist may have not cited out. There is a very minimal likelihood that the patient gave the correct and informed accord on the indicated roles prior to the commencement of the relationship. Military clinicians and mental health professionals oft times struggle with cases of secrecy and upholding of confidentiality. Despite the fact that moral guidelines clearly state an unequivocal necessity to protect the privacy and secrets of the client as a pre-eminent moral obligation, federal laws and statues inflict rather important inhibitions on the right to privacy and secrecy for soldiers. This case may trigger LT Jones to believe that the federal statute is not being effectively interpreted by the executive officer and therefore this order ought not to override her moral obligation to uphold the confidentiality of her patient (Hepner, nod).
To successfully manage the ethical legal conflicts in the military practice the military system ought to align with the following plans of action.
Identification of ethical code and federal laws
Mental health providers who are unacquainted with given standards of their profession/area of expertise ethics code and at the same time lack a complete appreciation of the valid federal laws prevailing their work are somehow at a huge risk of inefficiency. Military psychologists ought always to revisit their moral code, visit educative workshops on ethics in military handling; be acquainted with knowledge and skills from current books as well constant consultations from their colleagues.
Development for a process of moral decision making
When legal disagreements come into existence, it is a moral standard to keep off from unpremeditated and harsh responses. When military clinicians and psychologists make a quick decision that a statute that is established legitimately does not align or it stands against a moral standard and does away with it in the support and favor total acquiescence with a moral standard, then the military health professionals might exacerbate a moral standard. It is of great importance to come up with an intentional process for the purpose of moral making of decision. Additionally, to follow the already established decision making process is quite economical in terms of brains and intellectual indulgent. In the midst of other things, the process of coming up with fine and acceptable decisions will uphold and strengthen the integrity of health providers. Also, it will enhance careful and well thought out answers and solutions to the prevailing problems in the entire sector. It will give clear cut outs on moral guidelines and the federal laws, additionally; it will provide collective consultation, the considerations of alternatives as well as the strategies. Finally, it will provide an approach to indicate and monitor the aftermaths of the entire process.
Recognition of the military service as a sector that does not overrule
All the health providers in the military sector must make sure their implemented efforts does not lose focus or take another channel other than what they are supposed to do. More specifically when serving in sandwiched places and when providing their services for a longer period of time in the military wings. They must safeguard against basic allegiance to the customs and traditional ways of doing things in the military sector. They ought to remain focused and clinched to their career paths so as to remain relevant in their undertakings. This will help establish a cordial environment between the health providers and their clients. Furthermore it will create trustworthy in their works and establish them as more reliable.
Determination of the dilemma
In this case, the dilemma is to be determined whether it constitutes tension of conflict. Military experts ought to relax in assuming that an ostensible rigidity or incongruence between a legitimate order and basic allegiance to the customs of the military sector are at the expense of Devotion to certified ethics. Medical and healthcare certified persons ought to remain attached to their professional bodies and organizations and frequently sensitize on their mixed urgency position.
Balance of Client best interests
During a moral legitimate conflict, it is of great importance to impose a question on yourself, “what will be in my client’s best interest and what means can i use to prevent the cause of harm?” in most cases, following the letter of federal law and statutes will not cause harm to a client or even his or her status in the military environment. Even if enduring and abiding in the law unswervingly demeans a moral standard, sometimes aligning with a statute, principle, law, or regulation may be quite detrimental to a client. It is of great value to put into considerations the best interest of clients at all times. When disagreements, differences, and conflicts arise, it is important to discuss on several alternatives before proceeding. Lastly, it is of ultimate significance and good to put into consideration the principle of “clinical fidelity” when assessing your responsibility to the client.
Work to minimalize conflicts
All professional moral standards order certified experts to function and work at amending ethical legal conflicts by attracting them to the courtesy of suitable authorities. Some instances that may lead to health providers going against ethical conflicts are; when instructed to reveal material that is not related to a client’s military working; when told to testify to a patron’s erotic angle; when given commands by a longer military officer to adjust spots and handlings to conform to a rule featuring the essentials of officers. It is within the jurisdiction of mental health providers to make the moral differences and disagreements known to their boss and work to change the program whenever conceivable. Silence is not a morally acceptable rejoinder to moral/ethical legal differences and conflicts. To work towards making it less for differences to occur is the one and only important thing that health providers can do inerter to create a believer in their work. While everyone has the right to confidentiality, that sense of privacy and secrecy must be upheld. This can only be done through the cooperation of health providers across all wings in the military sector.
References
Devine, J. (2006). Daily Migraine Prevention and Its Influence on Resource Utilization in the Military Health System . Ft. Belvoir: Defense Technical Information Center.
Hepner, K. Quality of Care for PTSD and Depression in the Military Health System .
Hoyt, T. (2017). Clinical Supervision and Management of U.S. Army Behavioral Health Technicians. Military Behavioral Health , 1-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21635781.2017.1379451
Morgan, J., Hourani, L., Tueller, S., Strange, L., Lane, M., & Lewis, G. (2017). Effects of Sleep Issues on Suicidal Ideation in a Military Sample: The Mediating Role of Mental Health. Military Behavioral Health , 1-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21635781.2017.1406415
Smith-Osborne, A., & Jani, J. (2014). Long Distance Military and Civilian Relationships: Women's Perceptions of the Impact of Communication Technology and Military Culture. Military Behavioral Health , 2 (4), 293-303. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21635781.2014.963759
