Search

This study aimed to explore the ethical considerations of psychologists who counsel sexual assault victims and are summoned by the court to testify. Judicial proceedings for sexual assault victims often challenge conviction of perpetrators because of insufficient evidence. Therefore, the court regards the professional knowledge and testimonial information of psychologists as important reinforcing evidence. Thus, they involve ethical issues of whether to disclose and the degree of disclosure. Currently, there is no training in forensic psychology or legal risks in the Taiwanese school curricula. Because psychologists are unfamiliar with judicial rules and ethics, they may be at risk of making mistakes that could affect their future professional status. The ethical aspects addressed in this study included three major ethical judgment issues: professional knowledge, informed consent, and confidentiality. The research method adopted a grounded theory orientation. Nine interviewees with experience in court testifying were recruited through conceptualization and snowball sampling. Data were collected using individual interviews and qualitatively analyzed using open, axial, selective, and process coding. The research results show that when psychologists are summoned by the court to testify, they are faced with whether to appear in court. The decision to appear in court and the preparation involve three major ethical judgment issues: professional knowledge, informed consent, and confidentiality. Court-summoned psychologists have to understand the implications of their role and consider the ethics of being summoned to appear. This decision is based on civic responsibility rather than personal will. It requires interprofessional competencies and the ability to respond to courts and professional assessments, including knowledge of the laws regarding sexual assault. They should consider the rights of minors' guardians and inform individual victims as much as possible to enable them to fully understand and provide informed consent. Victims' privileged communications should be properly used and victim information disclosed in court should be filtered. Psychologists must be loyal to the victims' original intentions, consider their best interests, and exclude irrelevant personal privacy information. Psychologists are also reminded to seek professional assistance when facing the court, including consulting lawyers or receiving supervision and educational training, and being equipped with court knowledge related to sexual assault. Psychologists testifying in court face a process of external legal obedience and an internal conscience struggle. They defend their professionalism and develop appropriate actions. Simultaneously, psychologists measure the objective role of maintaining neutrality and being aware of clients' motivation for counseling. In conclusion, psychologists have to consider external objective legal norms and their internal subjective conscience when testifying in court and maintain a neutral and objective professional role. Finally, considering the research findings, this study proposes a "Dual-ethical Consideration Model for Psychologists Appearing in Court" and suggestions for future research and practice. Psychologists should accumulate different court experiences based on the number of court appearances. We recommend discussing whether the judicial role of psychologists has various stages of development based on the accumulation of court experience. Additionally, psychologists with different testifying roles will also have different ethical awareness and judgment processes, which can also be studied in depth. In practice, we recommended strengthening education and training on testifying in court, understanding that testifying in court is a citizen's obligation, and carefully using victims' privileged communication. Simultaneously, practical work manuals and workshops for court appearances should be developed to assist psychologists in conducting interviews through practical guidance and exercises. They should be prepared for the stress and circumstances of going to court. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Chinese Journal of Guidance & Counseling is the property of Chinese Journal of Guidance & Counselling and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Chinese Journal of Guidance & Counseling is the property of Chinese Journal of Guidance & Counselling and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)