JCPSLP Vol 17 Supplement 1 2015

JCPSLP

Volume 17, Supplement 1, 2015 – Ethical practice in speech pathology

Journal of Clinical Practice in Speech-Language Pathology

Ethics in the workplace

are in no way to be seen as a critique of their work, but

rather as a reflection on my own growing understanding

of what we mean by “ethics” and ethical conduct. Any

misinterpretations or erroneous assertions are mine alone.

The Code of Ethics of Speech

Pathology Australia

The Speech Pathology Australia Code of Ethics is based on

a number of key principles of professional ethics

(Beauchamp & Childress, 2001):

•

beneficence – we seek to benefit others;

•

non-maleficence – we seek to prevent harm to others;

•

truth – we tell the truth;

•

fairness – we strive for equal access to services for our

clients and do not show bias or favouritism;

•

autonomy – we respect the rights of our clients to

selfdetermination and autonomy;

•

professional integrity – we are respectful, courteous,

competent and honour promises and commitments.

As detailed on the Code of Ethics, these principles

are enacted through attending to a range of duties to

our clients and community, employers, profession and

colleagues. These principles and duties are explained and

application of them is illustrated in the Ethics Education

Package (Speech Pathology Australia, 2002).

The ethical decision-making

protocol

Brown and Lamont (no date) developed a five-stage

protocol which was included in the Speech Pathology

Australia Ethics Education Package. Several case studies

were developed to which this protocol was applied. The

stages in the protocol are to ascertain:

•

the facts of the case and the ethical scenario;

•

whether an ethical problem exists which requires action;

•

the nature of the problem;

•

a proposed decision and action plan;

•

an evaluation plan to see if the ethical dilemma has been

successfully managed.

Strengths and weaknesses of the

Code of Ethics and the Ethics

Education Package

In many ways our Code of Ethics is a powerful tool. The

code uses a framework of aspirational ethics. That is, the

code is expressed in language of “we aim to…” rather than

the traditional “thou shalt not …” approach to writing codes

This paper asks speech pathologists to

reflect on what it means to think and act

ethically in routine clinical practice. The

purposes of the paper are fourfold. First, I

discuss my views of the strengths and

limitations of the current Code of Ethics of

Speech Pathology Australia (2000) and Ethical

Decision-Making Protocol contained in the

Ethics Education Package (Speech Pathology

Australia, 2002). Second, I discuss some

pressures in contemporary practice which

call for ethical thinking deeply embedded in

daily practice rather than a focus just on

ethical dilemmas. Third, routine challenges

for speech pathologists in thinking ethically

are considered, and finally I conclude with

some suggestions for approaches to

professional development of ethical thinking.

his paper is based on an invited presentation

entitled

Ethics: Why does it matter

, delivered at the

annual conference of Speech Pathology Australia

in May 2005. While there are scholarly publications

regarding ethics in speech pathology practice (see for

example Pannbacker, Middleton & Vekovius, 1996; The

Ethics Roundtables and other statements on ethics of

the American Speech-Language Hearing Association

(ASHA) over the years), these are not based on research

into ethical reasoning and ethical conduct in speech

pathologists. Smith (2002), Kenny, Lincoln and Reed (2004)

and Wilson and McAllister (in progress) have researched

the development of ethical reasoning in students. In the

absence of research and a literature base on ethics in

practicing speech-language pathologists, this paper reflects

my opinions and experiences as: a co-author of the Code

of Ethics (Speech Pathology Australia, 2000) and the Ethics

Education Package (Speech Pathology Australia, 2002), as

a university educator helping students learn to think and

act ethically, and as a mentor to practising clinicians with

a range of professional practice experience. I would like to

acknowledge the contributions to the development of my

thinking about ethics of Dr Teresa Anderson, Louise Brown

and Meredith Kilminster, coauthors with me of the Code

of Ethics and the Ethics Education Package. My critiques

of the Code of Ethics and the Ethics Education Package

Ethics in the workplace

More than just using ethical decision-making protocols

Lindy McAllister

KEYWORDS

DECISION

MAKING

ETHICS

MORAL

REASONING

THINKING