JCPSLP Vol 17 No 3 2015

In this reflection, JC has commented on how working in a supported environment allows her to access such advice. This highlights how important it is for new graduates to be able to access professional mentoring and support on a regular basis to discuss such scenarios and build up their “casuistry”. JC’s reflection also highlights how most of the ethical issues she encounters are not dilemmas or major crises, just potential issues. This reminds us of the importance of being proactive rather than reactive in every day professional (ethical) practice. A newly graduated speech pathologist reflecting on ethical issues both as a student and a new graduate SC The Speech Pathology Australia Code of Ethics (2010) provides a framework for clinical decision-making, and accountability and practice guidelines. Such codes assist individuals by outlining their legal obligations as distinct from the personal values of a professional and the values of the profession” (Cross, Leitão, & McAllister, 2015). As a certified practicing speech pathologist, I draw upon the Speech Pathology Australia code in my daily professional activities. For example, I refer to the code for report writing (most specifically the Standards of Practice descriptors 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4) and prioritising clients (most specifically the Principles descriptor 2.1). However, I draw upon the code most heavily to guide my thought processes and subsequent actions when lines blur between my professional self and my everyday self. I identify as a speech pathologist. For most of us, speech pathology is not simply a job. Despite the romanticism associated with this notion, it can be troublesome. The first time the SPA code became truly salient to me in the real world was during my clinical training. During an assessment session for the early intervention team, I recognised my partner’s friend, Jane 2 , the mother of a child recently diagnosed with “X”. The recognition was not reciprocated; however, I had to work hard to maintain the demeanour of my professional self. A few weeks later, my partner showed me a video of Jane and her child through social media. No detail of the child’s diagnosis was referred to in the social media post, but it was evident that the child presented “atypically”. I had to fight the urge to explain to my partner that I knew why since I was part of the assessment process. The SPA Code, specifically the Standards of Practice relating to confidentiality (3.1.4), made the decision to either remain silent or explain clear. There was no ethical dilemma, so I remained silent. Since graduating, I have been faced with ethical dilemmas. Most commonly, I have had friends and families accessing or in need of speech pathology services. They have in turn asked me specifically to provide intervention. A primary reason for this is the ubiquitous waitlists for both public and private paediatric speech pathology services. Perhaps I should recommend a clinician I know personally, but do I really know they will be the best fit for these families (3.1.3)? Or is this in fact implicating the Autonomy (2.4) of these potential clients by removing them from the decision-making process? Or should I consider the

whole issue a Conflict of Interest (3.3.7) that violates the collective Values of the code? As I refer the code to frame the iterations of my decision-making, I decide that this does constitute a conflict of interest, and is no longer a dilemma. More apparent is how good decision-making as a clinician can be impacted by what seems like a relatively simple request from a friend or family. Fortunately, I have been able to direct the requests to the Speech Pathology Australia The Find a Speech Pathologist Search function (http:// www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au/information- for-the-community/find-a-speech-pathologist) and circumvent any conflicts of interest. The Speech Pathology Australia Code of Ethics (2010) provides a framework for clinical and practical decision- making. This is especially true when common sense is blurred between professional and everyday life. Suze Leitão and Trish Johnson – ethical reflections In 2006, Lindy McAllister challenged the profession to “think and act ethically in the daily routines of the workplace, not just when confronted with an ethical dilemma”. (McAllister, 2006, p. 79). In this final reflection, we can see how SC has found the SPA Code of Ethics to be of value in guiding decision-making, in particular when personal and professional worlds collide! We were also struck by the way in which SC has been able to turn some potentially challenging situations into a proactive way of thinking to guide every day thinking. These three reflections have shown how those “fresh eyes” are considering ethical issues in their daily practice, and how our goal of supporting the profession in moving from a reactive model of drawing on the code in response to a dilemma, complaint, or problem to a proactive model of ethical professional practice (risk management/risk prevention) is being realised. References Cross, R., Leitão, S., and McAllister, L. (2015). Think big, act locally: Responding to ethical dilemmas. Journal of Clinical Practice in Speech-Language Pathology , 17 (Supplement 1), 16–18. Kenny, B., Lincoln, M., & Balandin, S. (2007). A dynamic model of ethical reasoning in speech pathology. Journal of Medical Ethics , 33 (9), 508–513. Leitão, S., Bradd, P., McAllister, L., Russell, A., Block., S. Kenny, B., Smith, H., Wilson, C. (2014). Speech Pathology Australia Ethics Education Package . Melbourne: Speech Pathology Australia. McAllister, L. (2006). Ethics in the workplace: More than just using ethical decision making protocols. ACQuiring Knowledge in Speech, Language, and Hearing , 8 (2), 76–80. Speech Pathology Australia. (2010). Code of ethics . Melbourne: Author. 1 All students and new graduates have been de-identified to maintain confidentiality. 2 Jane is a pseudonym.

Correspondence to: Suze Leitão School of Psychology & Speech Pathology Curtin University S.Leitao@exchange.curtin.edu.au

165

JCPSLP Volume 17, Number 3 2015

www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au