Ethics

While the primary role of a therapist is to provide counseling services, therapists often assume further professional roles related to their special knowledge and training. For example, they may be consultants, expert witnesses, supervisors, authors, or teachers. As private persons, therapists also assume nonprofessional roles. They may be parents, football coaches, consumers, members of the PTA, friends, sexual partners, and countless other things.

In their diverse professional and private capacities therapists can contribute much to the overall happiness of the communities in which they live and work. When a professional assumes at least one additional professional or personal role with respect to the same clients, the relationship thus formed is termed a dual or multiple role relationship. For example, a teacher may also be the supervisor of one of his students/interns, or a counselor may also be a customer of a client/proprietor. Dual role relationships may occur simultaneously or consecutively (NASW, 1997, 1. 6. c). For example, a therapist has a consecutive dual role relationship when she counsels a former sexual partner or a former student. While not all dual role relationships are unethical (have potential to cause significant harm to client or other), sometimes the blending of the counseling role with certain personal roles or with certain other professional roles can generate serious moral problems. Throughout this paper this learner will consider intricacies of problematic dual role relationships. The environment this learner will focus on is schools and universities.

Two case studies will be presented, one exploring some key issues of sexual relations with clients, the other exploring some key issues of non-sexual dual role relationships. This learner will also apply the ACA code of ethics throughout this paper. Four sets of standards regarding ethical management of dual role relationships will be adduced.  Dual role relationships are morally problematic when they involve the therapist in a conflict of interest. According to Davis and Stark “a erson has a conflict of interest if he is in a relationship with one or more others requiring the exercise of judgment in the others’ behalf but has a special interest tending to interfere with the proper exercise of judgment in that relationship. ” For example, a therapist’s ability to counsel a client may be adversely affected if the counselor is also the client’s business partner. Insofar as a dual role relationship impairs the therapist’s ability to make judgments promotive of client welfare, the therapist has a moral responsibility to avoid such a relationship or to take appropriate steps to safeguard client welfare.

One possible manner of dealing with a dual role relationship involving a conflict of interest is to inform the client that the conflict exists. In this way, clients are treated as autonomous agents with the power to go elsewhere if and when they so choose. However, while such an approach will accord with candor and consideration for client autonomy, it may not alone resolve the moral problem. The potential for client harm may still persist in cases in which the client elects to stick with the relationship. Non-maleficence “first do no harm” should then take priority.

A further approach aiming at mitigating potential for client harm is to make full disclosure to the client and seek consultation and supervision in dealing with the conflict (Corey & Herlihy, 1997). According to Corey and Herlihy (1997), while this approach may be more “challenging” than avoiding dual role relationships altogether, “a willingness to grapple with the ethical complexities of day-to-day practice is a hallmark of professionalism. ” However, the client’s ability to “grapple” with the situation must also be taken into account.

In situations where the therapist seeks consultation and supervision to deal with a conflict of interest, candor requires that the therapist inform the client of such. Although different clients may respond differently to disclosure of this information, it should be considered what implications this arrangement may have from the client’s perspective. If the therapist cannot trust himself (without supervision) to act in concert with client welfare, will this adversely effect the client’s ability to trust the therapist in this or other situations?

The mere existence of the dual role relationship may itself present an obstacle for the client. For example, in a relationship in which the client barters for counseling services, the client may feel compelled to treat the therapist in a manner that exceeds ordinary customer expectations. The client’s perception may then be more important than the reality. Even if the therapist succeeds in maintaining independence of judgment through consultation and supervision, this may not matter if the client does not perceive the situation this way or if the client is otherwise unable to maintain objectivity.

In some situations, dual role relationships may be unavoidable. For example, in a rural locality in which there is only one practicing therapist and one bank, the therapist’s loan officer may also be the therapist’s client. In situations where avoiding the dual role is not possible or not feasible, the therapist should then take precautions such as informed consent, consultation, supervision, and documentation to guard against impaired judgment and client exploitation (ACA, 1995, A. 6. a).

Viewed in this light, therapists practicing under conditions where unavoidable dual role relationships are likely (for example, in small rural towns), have additional warrant for making and keeping in contact with other competent professionals willing to provide consultation or supervision upon request. Morally problematic dual role relationships may be sexual or non-sexual in nature. Sexual dual role relationships include ones in which therapists engage in sexual relations with current clients or with former clients.

Non-sexual dual role relationships include (but are not limited to) ones in which the therapist is also the client’s supervisor, business partner or associate, friend, employee, relative, or teacher. While these relationships are often avoidable, their problematic nature may go unnoticed. For example, in an effort to help a friend in need, a therapist may, with all good intentions, overlook potential for client harm. Professional and legal standards governing sexual relationships with current clients consistently forbid such relationships. Legal sanctions may include license revocation, civil suits, and criminal prosecution (Anderson, 1996).

According to The American Counseling Association Code of Ethics, “counselors do not have any type of sexual intimacies with clients and do not counsel persons with whom they have had a sexual relationship” (A. 7. a). The National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics justifies its own prohibition against providing clinical services to former sexual partners on the grounds that such conduct “has the potential to be harmful to the individual and is likely to make it difficult for the social worker and individual to maintain appropriate professional boundaries” (NASW, 1997, 1. 9. d) The potential harm resulting from sexual activities with clients has been documented. For example, citing the research of Kenneth S. Pope (1988), Herlihy and Corey (1997) have noted that harm may resemble that akin to victims of rape, battery, child abuse, and post traumatic stress.

These effects include “ambivalence, guilt, emptiness and isolation, identity/boundary/role confusion, sexual confusion, impaired ability to trust, emotional liability, suppressed rage, cognitive dysfunction, and increased suicidal risk” (. The prohibition against sexual activities with current clients has also been extended to students and supervisees. For example, according to the American Psychological Association Ethical Standards, “psychologists do not engage in sexual relationships with students or supervisees in training over whom the psychologist has evaluative or direct authority, because such relationships are so likely to impair judgment or be exploitative .

There is, however, less consensus on the question of sex with former clients. Although some states unconditionally regard sex with former clients as sexual misconduct, other state statutes, as well as codes of ethics, make exceptions. For example, Standard 4. 07 of the American Psychological Association Ethical Standards asserts the following:  Psychologists do not engage in sexual intimacies with a former therapy patient or client for at least two years after cessation or termination of professional services.  Because sexual intimacies with a former therapy patient or client are so frequently harmful to the patient or client, and because such intimacies undermine public confidence in the psychology profession and thereby deter the public’s use of needed services, psychologists do not engage in sexual intimacies with former therapy patients and clients even after a two-year interval except in the most unusual circumstances.

The psychologist who engages in such activities after the two years following cessation or termination of treatment bears the burden of demonstrating that there has been no exploitation, in light of all relevant factors, including  the amount of time that has passed since therapy terminated,the nature and duration of therapy, the circumstances of termination,the patient’s or client’s personal history, the patient’s or client’s current mental status, the ikelihood of adverse impact on the patient or client and others, and  any statements or actions made by the therapist during the course of therapy suggesting or inviting the possibility of a post-termination sexual or romantic relationship with the patient or client. The American Counseling Association has recently adopted a similar rule stipulating a minimum two year waiting period, and requiring counselors to “thoroughly examine and document that such relations did not have an exploitative nature” based upon similar criteria as those set forth in the above rule (ACA, Code, A. . b).

The American Association of Marriage and Family Counselors has also adopted a two year waiting period (AAMFT, 1991, 1. 12). Without stipulating a time period, the recent Code of Ethics of the National Association of Social Workers has provided that social workers should not engage in sexual activities or sexual conduct with former clients because of the potential for harm to the client. The latter also adds that if social workers act contrary to this prohibition or claim exceptional circumstances, then social workers, not their clients, “assume the full burden of demonstrating that the former client has not been exploited, coerced, or manipulated, intentionally or unintentionally” (NASW, 1997, 1. 09. c).

From a rule utilitarian perspective, a rule unconditionally forbidding sex with former clients may be warranted. First, as the above APA rule suggests, the circumstances of excusable sexual relationships with former clients are “most unusual. Second, therapists contemplating sexual relations with former clients may find it difficult to objectively examine and document that such relationships are not exploitative. Their “utilitarian calculations” may be biased. Third, insofar as sexual intimacies with former clients are frequently harmful to clients and tend to undermine public confidence in the profession and its services, permitting such relations risks a high measure of disutility. Accordingly, if therapists avoided sexual relationships with former clients without exception, then they would probably maximize overall happiness in the long run.

On the other hand, given discretionary standards such as those of the APA and ACA, it is important that therapists exercise such discretion wisely. The following case study is intended to shed light on confronting conflicts of interest when sexual interests become an issue. CASE 1 Sexual Dual Role Relationships: A Case of Mutual Sexual Attachment Crystal first met Dr. Walker, a thirty-eight-year-old psychologist, when she came to him for marital problems. Crystal, attractive, twenty-five-year-old women, had been married to her husband, Chris, for two years when she entered therapy.

Chris was a wealthy corporate CEO and at the time the couple met, Crystal was a fashion model working between jobs as a waiter in a popular nightclub. When the two were married, Chris insisted that Bethany give up her career goals and stay at home. Crystal cooperated with Chris, resigning from her job and severing all ties with her modeling agency. During the first few weeks of her marriage, after returning from a week-long honeymoon in Europe, she felt reasonably contented. However, as the weeks went on, she began to experience increasing dissatisfaction with her new life, which she subsequently described as “totally empty”.

Although she was frequently visited by friends, she still felt very much alone. Chris was often away on business and the couple’s relationship began to “feel strained” when the two were together. While they had previously enjoyed an active sex life, the couple gradually became sexually estranged. Crystal thought that their relationship might improve if she resumed her modeling career, but when Crystal tried to discuss the matter with Chris, he refused to listen to her, stating “I will not suffer the humiliation of having any wife of mine parading about like a piece of meat. When she suggested that they go to marriage counseling, Chris refused, saying that there was nothing that the two couldn’t resolve on their own. However, a close friend convinced Crystal to seek counseling, even though her husband would not agree to come along. The friend recommended Dr. Walker. In therapy with Dr. Walker, Crystal often expressed a desire to leave her husband but also expressed fears of “being by herself” and of not “making it on her own” without guidance from her husband.

On the one hand, she complained of boredom, loneliness, and desperation; on the other, she expressed reluctance to give up what she now had to return to the precariousness of her former existence. It was a lot “easier and less risky,” she said, “just to stay right where I am. ” Dr. Walker knew from personal experience how difficult it could be to stand up to the fear of making changes in one’s life without any guarantees. Having been through a divorce (three years ago) with a woman whom he had been married to for thirteen years, Dr. Walker felt a personal bond with Crystal. He too had struggled with similar issues and felt the force of inertia as he mustered up enough inner strength to leave a wife whom he had lived unhappily with for over a decade.

Hence, when Crystal began to make romantic overtures toward him (telling him that she found him extremely attractive, that she was falling in love with him, and asking him if he felt the same about her), Dr. Walker found himself in a more perplexing situation. In response to Crystal’s query about his feelings toward her, Dr. Walker responded by stating query about his feelings toward her, Dr. Walker responded by stating “I think you are a very attractive woman but as your therapist it would be inappropriate and definitely not in your best interest if I were to become personally involved with you. “

Although he considered Crystal’s overtures to be a result of transference, he began to question the appropriateness of counseling a women who awakened so much of his own personal turmoil, and he worried about the possibility of his own countertransference. Dr. Walker was indeed also sexually attracted to Crystal. While he was aware of other occasions in which he was sexually attracted to female clients whom he managed to successfully counsel, Dr. Walker felt less confident in the present case. Crystal had at this juncture been in therapy for six months. Although he believed that she had made significant progress in this period, he also believed that it would be in her best interest if she were referred to another therapist. He therefore decided to terminate therapy and to refer her. Dr. Walker explained to Crystal that he had personal problems of his own that made it inappropriate for him to continue as her therapist, and that it was in her best interest if she accepted his referral. Notwithstanding Crystal’s repeated pleas to know more, Dr. Walker refused to comment on what exactly those personal problems were except to emphasize that they were his, not her, problems.

Crystal declined the referral and, in tears, left his office, neither seeking nor receiving therapy from anyone else again. Dr. Walker did not himself seek professional counseling for his personal problems. However. s a result of his experience with Crystal, he did subsequently avoid practicing marriage counseling, especially with young, attractive female clients. About two years after ending their professional relationship, Dr. Walker met Crystal while shopping at a supermarket and they began to talk. Crystal explained that she had divorced Chris a year ago and that she was presently trying to get back into fashion modeling but was finding it difficult to make headway. The two exchanged phone numbers. A week later Dr. Walker called Crystal and asked her out on a date. They subsequently began a sexual relationship.

As we have seen, the primary purpose of a therapist is to promote the welfare of the client. In the present case, Dr. Walker’s decision to terminate Crystal’s counseling was a rational response to the problem of how best to fulfill this primary counseling mission. Dr. Walker was aware that his personal emotions were potentially harmful to Crystal’s continued therapeutic advancement. In particular, he was aware that his sexual attraction for this client coupled with his apparently unresolved feelings about his former marriage and divorce provided a climate for countertransference.

In this regard, Dr. Walker’s decision to terminate was in concert with the Principle of Loyalty insofar as his personal conflict prevented him from maintaining independence of judgment in the provision of treatment. As provided by APA Standard 1. 13c, a therapist who becomes aware of a personal problem that has potential for interfering with the provision of professional services should take “appropriate measures,” which may include terminating therapy. In making a referral upon termination, Dr. Walker further sought to safeguard client welfare. There was, of course, the risk that Crystal might refuse Dr. Walker’s referral and never again seek counseling, a possibility that did in fact come to pass. Dr. Walker was accordingly confronted with the problem of deciding which option referral versus continued therapy ran the greatest chance of minimizing harm and maximizing welfare for this client. In making this “utilitarian” determination, Dr. Walker could not, however, mechanically and dispassionately calculate the risks of each available option. On the one hand, he had to try to transcend his own subjective feelings in order to rationally assess the situation.

Yet, on the other hand, he had to stay in touch with those very same feelings which he sought to transcend in the process of deciding. Were the emotions he was now experiencing more of an impediment to successful counseling than previous experiences he had when he chose not to refer? Was the present case really different than the previous ones? To answer these questions, Dr. Walker could not merely be an “impartial” and “objective” observer applying a rational standard as Kantian ethics. Nevertheless, while he had to live his feelings in order to adequately represent them, he also had to attain some measure of “rational” distance from them.

According to Martin (1997) such “professional distance” can be defined as a reasonable response in pursuing professional values by avoiding inappropriate personal involvements while maintaining a sense of personal engagement and responsibility. Under-distancing is the undesirable interference of personal values with professional standards. Over-distancing is the equally undesirable loss of personal involvement, whether in the form of denying one’s responsibility for one’s actions or in the form of lacking desirable forms of caring about clients and community.

How can a professional determine whether client engagement avoids the above extremes and is therefore “proper”? Such determination, according to Martin (1997), constitutes an “Aristotelian mean” between these extremes. As such it must rest with perception and sound judgment enlightened by experience. As a general rule, this mean appears to be reached in therapy when the therapist gets as close to the client’s situation as possible without losing her ability to rationally assess it, for it is at this point that the therapist’s powers of empathetic caring and understanding are at their highest rational level.

The point at which a therapist has attained this mean and has therefore stretched her rational capacities to their limits appears to be relative to both situation and individual therapist and May not always be attainable. Thus, while Dr. Walker has successfully treated clients to whom he was sexually attracted, at least some therapists might not be able to successfully work with such clients and had best refer them. On the other hand, Dr. Walker was not sanguine about his ability to work with Crystal without under-distancing himself. In deciding whether or not to refer, Dr. Walker needed to remain personally engaged yet detached enough to make a rational judgment about what would best promote his client’s welfare. Paradoxically, he had to attain proper distance in order to decide whether, in counseling Crystal, he would be able to maintain proper distance. Martin (1997) claims that maintaining such distance within a professional relationship serves at least three important functions. First, it can help professionals to efficiently cope with difficult situations by keeping them from becoming emotionally overwhelmed.

Second, proper distance can help in promoting a professional’s respect for clients’ autonomy. Third, it can help a professional to maintain objectivity. Insofar as loss of professional distance militates against these three functions, serious potential for loss of proper professional distance in counseling Crystal would have afforded Dr. Walker sufficient reason for termination. In the first place, loss of professional distance, in particular under-distancing himself from Crystal, could have destroyed his ability to cope with Crystal’s crisis by resulting in countertransference. In such an instance, Dr. Walker’s inability to keep personal interests separate from those of client could well have clouded and distorted his professional judgment regarding client welfare and thereby preempted the provision of competent counseling services. With loss of proper professional distance, Dr. Walker would accordingly have also suffered loss of objectivity, that is”critical detachment, impartiality, the absence of distorting biases and blinders” (Martin (1997). Had Dr. Walker allowed his personal interests and emotions to seep into the professional relationship, his perception would have been biased and as such not objective.

For example, in overidentifying with Crystal’s plight as an extension of his own negative marital experience, he would no longer have been impartial. He would have had blinders on, interpreting Crystal’s circumstances in terms of his own values and interests, seeking resolution not of Crystal’s crisis but of his own. In Dr. Walker’s case, loss of proper professional distance could also have affected client autonomy by impairing his powers of empathy. We have seen that empathy can be an important autonomy facilitating virtue.

This virtue, however, entails proper professional distance by requiring a therapist to feel as if he were in the client’s subjective world “without ever losing the `as if’ quality. ” Dr. Walker’s failure to keep his own subjectivity separate from that of his client would have precluded the possibility of his “accurately sensing the feelings and meanings being experienced by the client,” for these experiences would have been filtered through Dr. Walker’s own veil of self-interest and personal emotions. As a result Dr. Walker would not have been able to competently help his client accurately clarify the feelings and meanings she was sensing. It is, however, through such increased self-understanding that Crystal could reasonably hope to gain greater control over her own behavior and life circumstances. Given serious potential for loss of proper professional distance, any attempt by Dr. Walker to continue counseling Crystal might therefore have been carried out behind a veil of self-interest and misguided ideas, impeding client progress toward greater autonomy and well-being, countering the primary counseling mission.

Under such conditions, Crystal’s own state of dependency would have rendered her vulnerable to the exploitation and manipulation that easily arises when a counselor does not clearly separate personal welfare, interests, or needs from that of the client. Dr. Walker’s decision to terminate was accordingly in concert with his moral responsibility not to apply the power and authority of his professional role in a manner that might exploit client dependency and vulnerability.

In keeping with the Principle of Vulnerability, the heightened vulnerability of this client due to the therapist’s diminished capacity for objectivity provided an occasion for exercising special care in guarding against infliction of client harm. This additional moral responsibility to take “special care” was discharged by Dr. Walker when, in consideration of his personal conflict, he decided to terminate. From a Kantian perspective, the rationale for termination is also apparent. As Crystal’s therapist, Dr. Walker’s role was to facilitate her increased personal autonomy.

However, by continuing therapy instead of terminating, he risked treating her as a “mere means” to the satisfaction of his own confused interests and desires rather than treating her as an autonomous agent. Dr. Walker’s motive for terminating Crystal’s therapy, namely to safeguard her welfare, could also consistently be willed to be a universal law inasmuch as such a law would be consistent with and supportive of the primary counseling mission. It is noteworthy, however, that not all motives for termination could meet this Kantian standard. For example, had Dr. Walker terminated Crystal’s therapy for the express purpose of beginning a sexual relationship with her, such a motive would not have been “universalizable. ” This is because, if therapists consistently and universally sacrificed their clients’ welfare whenever it suited their personal interests or needs, clients would not trust their therapists and therefore counseling would not effectively work. Furthermore, to consent to a universal law of such betrayal would be to consent to being treated as a “mere means” rather than as an autonomous agent, which no rational person would do.

It is thus apparent why the ACA now requires therapists who intend to have sexual relationships with former clients to ascertain that they did not terminate therapy as part of a plan to initiate a sexual relationship with the client (ACA, 1995, A. More generally the ACA also provides that counselors should “avoid actions that seek to meet their personal needs at the expense of clients” (ACA, 1995, A. 5. a). It might, however, be suggested that no violation of client autonomy occurs when a client consents to termination of therapy for purposes of beginning a sexual relationship.

After all, it might be said, is this not to respect the client’s will rather than to engage in any form of betrayal? Thus, supposing that Crystal were willing to discontinue therapy for purposes of pursuing sex with Dr. Walker, would Dr. Walker not have respected her autonomy (self-determination) by obliging her? Crystal’s attraction to Dr. Walker was a case of transference, carrying out a sexual relationship with her would have been to exploit and manipulate her dependency, not to foster her autonomy.

Given Crystal’s vulnerable state of mind, it is far from clear, however, that her consent could have been considered “free” and “uncoerced”. In the least, given Dr. Walker’s own impaired capacity for objectivity, and the potential to cause serious client harm, such conduct would have been a blatant violation of Dr. Walker’s moral responsibility to safeguard the welfare of a vulnerable client. In terminating the counseling relationship, should Dr. Walker have told Crystal why he was terminating her therapy? It is arguable that in not fully informing Crystal of the grounds of termination, Dr. Walker had failed to act in a manner befitting a candid and congruent therapist. In support of the Principle of Candor, the APA provides that “psychologists make reasonable efforts to answer patients’ questions and to avoid apparent misunderstandings about therapy”(APA, 1992, 4. 01. d). In further support, the ACA provides that “whenever counseling is initiated, and throughout the counseling process as necessary, counselors inform clients of the purposes, goals, techniques, procedures, limitations, potential risks and benefits of services to be performed, and other pertinent information” (ACA, 1995, A. . a).

In still further support, the ACA provides that in terminating counseling, counselors should aim at “securing agreement when possible” (A. 11. c). Unfortunately, Crystal was not afforded the opportunity to provide informed consent to termination in a much as she was denied information material to termination, and which any client in similar circumstances would reasonably want to know. Thereby, she was not treated as an “end in herself,” that is, as a self-determining agent. Additionally, Dr. Walker left Crystal in a state of frustration and bewilderment. Was she to blame for Dr. Walker’s decision to terminate despite his insistence that it was due to “his problem”? Since Dr. Walker had already admitted that he found Crystal to be attractive, was termination a result of his feelings toward her? Did he really love her? On the other hand, was he just offended by her having “come on” to him? In refusing to disclose his grounds for termination, Dr. Walker failed to achieve adequate closure to therapy, and Crystal was simply left “hanging. “

While Dr. Walker did previously state that he found Crystal to be “a very attractive woman,” this had been at Crystal’s own prompting. As such, this statement of his could well have been construed by Crystal as merely an attempt to appease her. As far as Dr. Walker did not follow through with an explicit, candid disclosure as pertinent to termination, therapy ended on an inauthentic note. In failing to “own” his own feelings, Dr. Walker missed a final and hence important opportunity to model congruence and so to encourage Crystal to take similar responsibility for her own future life decisions.

What, then, might Dr. Walker have said to Crystal in response to her request for further information about why he was terminating and referring her? The truth as presented along the following lines would probably have been sufficient: “I have not completely worked through my own divorce, which, coupled with my own sexual attraction for you, has made it difficult for me to remain professionally objective and to provide you with the competent counseling services to which you are entitled.

In cases like this, it is my professional responsibility to refer you to someone who will afford you such services. ” In making disclosure along these lines, Dr. Walker would have responded in a manner befitting a candid and congruent therapist, and accordingly in such a manner consistent with the primary counseling mission. Dr. Walker’s experience with Crystal appropriately alerted him to the possibility that his own “unfinished business” surrounding his divorce justified refraining from accepting clients whose profiles were similar to Crystal’s.

In this regard, in concert with the Principle of Loyalty, the APA (1992) provides that psychologists “refrain from undertaking an activity when they know or should know that their personal problems are likely to lead to harm to patent, client or other person to whom they may owe a professional or scientific obligation” (1. 13. a). Dr. Walker failed to have worked through his own marital issues affected his ability to provide competent counseling services, Dr. Walker also had a professional responsibility to obtain competent counseling for himself.

Thus, in concert with the Principle of Non-Maleficence, the ACA provides that “counselors refrain from offering or accepting professional services when their physical, mental or emotional problems are likely to harm a client or others. They are alert to the signs of impairment, seek assistance for problems, and, if necessary, limit, suspend, or terminate their professional responsibilities”(ACA, 1995, C. 2. g). In the present case neither Dr. Walker nor Crystal sought therapy for their personal problems after their professional relationship ceased.

It was under these circumstances, about two years later, that Dr. Walker and Crystal began a sexual relationship. It was therefore quite possible that Crystal’s sexual attraction and willingness to begin a sexual relationship with Dr. Walker was a result of the same transference problem that led Dr. Walker to terminate therapy in the first place. Similarly, it is also quite possible that Dr. Walker’s own sexual attraction and willingness to begin a sexual relationship with Crystal were themselves an actualization of his previously perceived tendency to countertransfer.

If so, then the possibility for client manipulation and harm which existed in therapy could be hypothesized to continue to exist in the personal relationship. Furthermore, since in his personal relationship with Crystal Dr. Walker was no longer expected to maintain professional distance or to be objective, the potential for even greater client manipulation and harm could be hypothesized to exist. In keeping with the Principle of Non-Maleficence, Dr. Walker had a professional responsibility to avoid harming others, which clearly included former clients.

Dr. Walker entry into a personal relationship with Crystal placed her at significant risk of harm and arguably at even greater risk than in their previous professional relationship Dr. Walker had a professional responsibility to avoid such a relationship with Crystal. In addition, since this potential for harm may be traced to the exercise of power and authority established in the therapeutic context, Dr. Walker may be viewed as having used his professional powers and authorities in a manner inconsistent with Crystal’s welfare.

Furthermore, a rule of “once a client, always a client” would seem to derive force from the implausibility of supposing that a client’s welfare matters only within the professional context but subsequently becomes expendable as soon as therapy is (formally) ended. Further, given that professional safeguards were no longer expected in the personal relationship, all knowledge previously acquired in the therapeutic context was no longer insulated from personal use. Thus, by virtue of his personal relation with Crystal, Dr. Walker was no longer expected to remain objective and professionally distanced, yet he was still privy to information previously protected by such professional responsibilities. Given the emotional dynamics of personal relationships, the potential for misuse of such knowledge will have accordingly increased. For example, in the throws of an emotionally heated disagreement, Dr. Walker might allow his perception to be colored by his intimate knowledge of Crystal’s former marriage. This could in turn affect the manner of his own verbal, behavioral and emotional responses to Crystal.

Insofar as knowledge acquired under a bond of professional confidentiality, is subsequently used for personal purposes, the Principle of Discretion will also be breached. As the APA (1992) states, “Psychologists discuss confidential information obtained in clinical or consulting relationships only for appropriate professional and scientific purposes… ” (5. 03. b); and it is clear use of private client information for personal, self-interested reasons falls outside the purview of such legitimate purposes. It is possible. of course, that Dr. Walker could manage to keep such private information out of his personal life.

Nevertheless, therapists are human beings who have emotions and do not always perform at their best. Therefore, expecting therapists to avoid at all times being influenced by prior clinical knowledge of a person with whom they are intimately relating may be asking too much of the most well-adjusted. In Dr. Walker’s case, however, there were already reasons for supposing that he had unresolved problems that would make such expectations all the more unrealistic. Furthermore, maintaining such a stature is tantamount to expecting the therapist to fulfill his professional esponsibilities within the context of a personal relationship. Role expectations between professional and personal relationships, are however, notoriously inconsistent. Thus, in personal relationships, “there is an expectation that the needs of both parties will be met in a more or less reciprocal manner. It is difficult to consistently put the consumer’s needs first if one is also invested in meeting one’s own needs. ” And, accordingly, “as the incompatibility of expectations increases between roles, so will the potential for misunderstanding and harm” (Kitchener, 1988).

On analysis, it is therefore clear that, in starting a sexual relation with a former client, Dr. Walker acted contrary to the primary counseling mission by taking substantial, unwarranted risks. Even though Dr. Walker waited two years before starting a sexual relation as some standards (for example, APA and ACA) require, there were strong reasons militating against starting the relationship. Furthermore, had Dr. Walker attempted to document that this relationship did not have an exploitative basis, it is questionable that Dr. Walker himself would have been in a situation to objectively assess the matter.

Under the circumstances, it would have been more fitting had he called in a consultant to help him to decide the matter (ACA, 1995, C. 2. e). Such unbiased ethics assessment would probably have been more reliable than Dr. Walker’s own determination. It is evident that a two year waiting period is not itself a reliable index of warranted sexual relations with former clients. As the APA has suggested, warrant for sexual relations with former clients is “most unusual. ” Had Dr. Walker seen Crystal on a single occasion without having established an ongoing professional relation with her, such warrant would have been arguable.

Here, however, there is still danger of the appearance of conflict of interest–or even worse, of exploitation of clients. A profession cannot afford to have its image tarnished. A therapist concerned for the welfare of prospective clients cannot afford to neglect professional image. A professional known to have had sex with former clients–no matter how well the relation might have been documented–does nothing to promote an image of a trustworthy and virtuous therapist in the public eye. Finally, legal requirements need not always be in harmony with professional standards.

While some causes may sometimes be morally compelling enough to override obedience to law, it is unlikely that violation of a state statute in order to engage in a sexual relation with a former client would qualify. If sexual relations with former clients were legally regarded as sexual misconduct in the state in which Dr. Walker practiced, there would have been further reason, an overriding and compelling reason, for his not engaging in such a relation with Crystal. In the absence of such a state statute, there would also have been a compelling case against it.

The following rules of dual role relationships may be gathered from the case study. While they are not intended to be exhaustive of all such possible rules, they are intended to supplement ones provided under Principles of Loyalty and Non-Maleficence. General Rules Regarding Dual Role Relationships:  In considering whether a dual role relationship is morally problematic and should be avoided or terminated therapists considers the potential for loss of the client’s independence of judgment as well as that of their own.

Therapists consider the adverse effects that pursuing certain types of dual role relationships (for instance, sexual relations with former clients) might have on the public image of their profession, and avoid apparent conflicts of interest as well as actual ones. Therapists avoid any dual role relationship in which a serious potential for misappropriation of confidential information exists (for instance, the use of such information for malicious or self-serving purposes).

Therapists who have institutional affiliations (for instance, teach at colleges or universities or work in agencies) avoid provision of therapy to other employees with whom they have or are likely to have working relations. Therapists establish and maintain contact with other qualified professionals available to render competent, independent ethics consultation or supervision in case conflicts of interest make the therapists’ own judgment questionable.

GR’s 1 through 4 are based upon the premise that therapists should take reasonable measures to avoid all dual role relationships for which there exists serious potential for loss of independence of judgment–the client’s as well as the therapist’s–and conflicts of interest–apparent and actual. The aforementioned rules provide some key considerations for avoiding such relationships. When therapists cannot feasibly avoid a conflict of interest, then they should fully inform the affected clients about the conflict, and, with the clients’ consent, seek consultation and/or supervision from other qualified professionals . GR 5 has been advanced in support of the latter premise. In satisfying GR 5, therapists who work in agencies should establish and maintain contact with other competent professionals who practice outside their agencies and are therefore more likely to provide independent, nonbiased consultation or supervision. Therapists who practice in isolated rural areas have an especially compelling interest in establishing and maintaining such contacts.

As is true with respect to other rules, the present ones are intended to help in guiding therapists’ decisions regarding dual role relationships, but are not intended as a substitute for careful ethical reflection. For instance, while avoidance of apparent conflicts of interest is important for maintaining professional image, GR 2 must be applied with regard for the welfare, interests, and needs of particular clients. For example, a therapist might justly tolerate public appearance of a conflict of interest in order to prevent serious harm to an identifiable client while such involvement purely for personal gain would be unacceptable.

GR 1 underscores that morally problematic dual role relationships can arise not only when the therapist encounters a conflict of interest but also when the client’s independence of judgment is impaired. Since either case can result in ineffective or self-defeating therapy, a therapist may have compelling reason for avoiding or terminating a dual role relationship even when it is only the client’s judgment that is adversely affected. The use of the term “qualified professional” in GR 5 refers to another competent therapist as well as to a competent professional in a related area such as a professional ethicist.

The term “working relations” in GR 4 means direct employee relations arising out of the cooperative performance of specific job-related tasks. Such tasks include secretarial, administrative, custodial, maintenance, committee, and departmental functions. Working relations must involve direct contact, which means exchange of information by face-to-face contact or other channels such as e-mail, phone or interoffice memo. In general, the more frequent and intimate the job-related ontact between therapist and client, the greater the potential for loss of independence of judgment by both parties. Thus, an occasional interoffice memo may not be as risky as on-going face-to-face contact. The term “working relation” does not apply simply because two individuals have the same employer. In a very large institution such as a state university, it is possible that two employees have no working relation, but this is less likely to be true in smaller institutions such as counseling agencies.

Rules Regarding Sexual Relations with Former Clients

Therapists do not engage in sexual relations with current clients and generally avoid sexual relations with former clients. In rare cases in which therapists are considering the warrant for sexual relations with former clients (for instance, in cases where no ongoing therapeutic relationship has been established), they consult with other competent, impartial professionals in documenting the non-exploitative nature of the considered relations.

SF 2 Therapists recognize that their former clients like current clients can still be vulnerable to sexual manipulation, and therefore avoid taking undue sexual advantage of these individuals Therapists do not assume that their former clients’ agreement to enter into sexual relations with them constitutes freely given consent. SF 3 If the state in which a therapist practices regards all sexual relations with former clients as sexual misconduct, then therapists do not engage in any such relations even where warrant for the relation might otherwise exist.

In SF 2, the term “undue sexual advantage” refers to the exploitation of any client weakness related to the prior therapist-client relationship, for example, an unresolved client transference issue, persistent client dependency on the therapist, or the therapist’s position of power and authority over the client. Insofar as such client weaknesses may persist after therapy has been terminated, the burden of proof resides with the therapist to show that the client’s consent to a sexual relation with the therapist is not a result of such factors but rather constitutes the client’s autonomous, uncoerced consent (NASW, 1997, 1. 9. c). In the rare cases in which this can be shown, SF 1 requires that documentation include the favorable outcome of consultation with at least one other independent, competent professional (as defined above) in addition to such documentation specified in other pertinent standards addressed in this chapter (APA, 1992, 4. 07; ACA, 1995, A. 7. b). While a virtuous therapist would ordinarily have regard for law, we have noted that some causes such as prevention of serious harm to a client may sometimes militate against compliance with law.

Rule SF 3, however, is intended to make clear that satisfaction of the therapist’s sexual interests even when coupled with that of the former client does not warrant or mitigate the legal transgression. Rules Regarding Sexual Attraction to Clients: AC 1 Therapists are not disqualified from counseling clients to whom they are sexually attracted so long as they are able to provide these clients with competent, professional services.

However, if they have or, in the course of therapy, develop sexual attractions for clients which impair or are likely to impair the therapists’ independence of judgment, then they terminate therapy and make appropriate referrals. AC 2 Therapists do not accept as clients individuals from certain populations (for instance, certain gender and age categories) for whom sexual feelings are likely to impair independence of judgment. In such cases therapists take appropriate steps to overcome their personal problems, such as seeking therapy for themselves, before taking on such individuals as clients.

AC 3 In cases where therapists terminate therapy due to mutual sexual attraction, therapists inform clients as to the nature of termination, and do not misrepresent or mislead clients as to the cause of termination. .AC 1 assumes that sexual attraction for at least some clients is frequent occurrence and is not in itself a reason for terminating therapy. AC 1 affords therapists the autonomy to decide whether such attraction is of such a quality as to impair professional judgment. Therapists’ sexual attractions for clients may however sometimes be related to therapists’ own “unfinished business. In such cases AC 2 recognizing the need to address such personal problems therapeutically before counseling groups of clients to whom the sexual attraction may be generalized. AC 3 is supported by both Principles of Honesty and Candor in requiring therapists with sexual attractions for clients to avoid deception in informing these clients of the grounds for termination.

Rules Regarding Therapy with Students

Therapists do not engage in therapy with current students or those with whom current students have intimate relationships. Consistent with client welfare, therapists may engage in therapy with former students. TS 2 while therapists may not solicit students for referrals, they may accept unsolicited referrals from students.  If, during the course of therapy, therapists’ clients also become their students, therapists take reasonable steps to terminate the ensuing dual role relationships, including terminating therapy and providing appropriate referrals. Therapists inform their clients of all significant risks related to maintaining such dual role relationships and, consistent with client welfare, decline to remain in both roles.

Therapists support and encourage their clients’ own informed, autonomous choices in resolving the conflict.  Therapists who ascertain that prospective clients are likely to become their students decline to accept such individuals as clients. As part of their clients’ informed consent to therapy, therapists who teach inform potential students (clients whose profiles suggest that they might become students) of a professional responsibility not to engage in therapy with their students. In TS 1, the term “intimate relationships” includes family members such as parents, step parents, grandparents, and siblings.

The term also includes significant others such as boyfriends or girlfriends, fiancees, and sexual partners. While an individual may not have a close relationship with all family members, the probability that the family bond will implicate the student is substantial enough to justify a strict rule against counseling family members of students. Although TS 2 permits therapists to accept as clients the unsolicited referrals from students, it is noteworthy that, in concert with TS 1, such permissible, unsolicited referrals do not include individuals with whom students have intimate relationships.

TS 3 provides that therapists should take “reasonable measures” to terminate non-elective dual role relationships with students. In the context of therapy this means measures which are consistent with client welfare, and which accordingly promote client trust and autonomy. The rule provides that clients be afforded maximal autonomy in deciding how the dual role relationship will be resolved; for example, whether the student-teacher relationship will be preserved and the therapist-client relationship erminated, or conversely. TS 4 recognizes the utility of taking preventative measures to increase the likelihood that a non-elective dual role relationship with students is avoided before it is established by the student. It also conforms with the Principle of Candor in making clear, from the start, the Therapist’s professional responsibility not to counsel students. In this way, the therapist’s move to discontinue such a relationship (should one later be established) comes as no surprise to the client.

References

1. American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy (1991). Code of ethics. Washington, DC: AAMFT
2. American Association of University Professors (1990). Statement on professional ethics. AAUP Policy Documents and Reports, 75-76.
3. American Counseling Association (1995). Code of ethics. Alexandria, VA: ACA. American Psychological Association (1992). Standards of ethics. Washington, DC: APA.
4. Anderson, B. S. (1996). The counselor and the law. 4th Ed. Alexandria, VA: ACA. Davis, M. & A. Stark (in press). Conflict of interest and the professions. New York: Oxford University Press. Herlihy, B. &
5. G. Corey (1997). Boundary issues in counseling: Multiple roles and responsibilities. Alexandria, VA: ACA.
6. Kitchener, K. S. (1988). Dual role relationships: What makes them so problematic? Journal of counseling and development, 67, 217-221.
7. Martin, M. W. (1997). Professional distance. International journal of applied philosophy. 12(1). National Association of Social Workers (1997). Code of ethics. Washington, DC: NASW.

“The public has an insatiable curiosity to know everything. Except what is worth knowing. Journalism, conscious of this, and having tradesman-like habits, supplies their demands. ” Oscar Wilde. Few would doubt that the media is one of the few platforms that affords people the ability to inform, entertain, and influence society. The privilege of having such voice and influence comes with great responsibility. It is crucial that those in a position of such power behave in a responsible and ethical manner.

Journalist across all mediums are held to a strong ethical standard in their profession as their work can to completely change the publics view of any given topic or event. It is obvious that technology is having a tremendous impact on all forms of media. While past generations waited for the evening news or the morning paper, people today are reaching for the internet at any time of the day or night to get the latest information. While this instant access has helped curb the public’s insatiable curiosity for information, it has also raised a whole new set of questions regarding the ethics and values in the media industry.

One of the most compelling questions to arise out of this new era is whether the media industry has forsaken its core ethics and values for its own gain. Values are very personal choices which are compromised of the individual experiences in life. They are choices that help one prioritize their life. Values can be influenced by a number of factors such as family, upbringing, religion, and society. They help one define and project character attributes such as loyalty, compassion and honesty. Values are instrumental in how we behave and the choices we make.

Ethics are professional rules that define how different groups of people should behave. There is a distinct sense of right and wrong with little room for “grey” or questionable behavior. Ethics guide and dictate what is professional and acceptable to each given profession. To behave ethically is to behave in a manner consistent with what is right and or moral for the profession. Values and ethics are forever at a crossroads because today’s society pushes towards personal wealth. The stakes are constantly raised as far as what it takes to gain that wealth.

It is not uncommon for people to share private information, set someone up, edit what a person has said or completely alter a picture someone has taken for their gain. It is in situations like this that values are tested and ethics are ignored. Professional values and ethics are commonly derived from government laws and regulations, state licensing boards, and trade associations. A professions code of conduct will “contain provisions that are designed to advise, guide, and regulate behavior on the job. ”  There are also federal, state and local laws which regulate and enforce most professional industries.

According to The United States Department of Labor (n. d), Government agencies such as OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) were created to “assure safe and healthful working conditions for working men and women; by authorizing enforcement of the standards developed under the Act; by assisting and encouraging the States in their efforts to assure safe and healthful working conditions…” . Professional associations such as the Society of Professional Journalist also have their own values and ethics which are set forth to guide their members. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist’s credibility. Each association clearly outlines its expectations in hopes that all members will abide by them and act in a professional manner. One of the biggest sectors of media affected by ethical conflicts is the advertising market. “For some business ethicists, advertising is one of the most crucial issues in corporate ethics because its pervasiveness and because of its power to mold consumer thinking and behavior.

For example, many have argued that advertising is a form of a behavior control, given its subtle psychological persuasion and its repetitiveness. One such argument holds that advertising creates in the mind of the consumer a need – not just want – for that which is advertised. When the consumer in question happens to be a child subjected to a barrage of TV ads about toys, sugared cereals, candy, and so on, then the ethics of advertising taken as a form of behavior control is even more crucial. “

Photographers also face backlash as women’s advocacy groups rail against the use of airbrushed models in print media. “You have to accept that fashion is fantasy. It’s wearable art,” says Andrew Matusik, a New York fashion photographer and the owner of Digital Retouch, which specializes in celebrity and fashion retouching. “It’s all about creating drama. ”  It is widespread knowledge that any photographer with any basic graphic design skills can and will alter an image to suit his client’s needs.

As technology evolves so do the ethical standards which advertisers and photographers are held to. Another form of media mired in controversy is reality based investigative news shows. One such show, Dateline’s “To Catch a Predator” purported to take child sex predators off the street as they taped a series of sting operations set up by various law enforcement agencies. The show faced a firestorm of criticism when a Dallas, Texas man committed suicide moments before he was to be arrested on charges of engaging in sexually explicit chat with a minor.

The man’s family sued the network and won a substantial award. The presiding judge ruled “that the network crossed the line from responsible journalism to irresponsible and reckless intrusion into law enforcement. ” (Shea, 2008). Although the show was very successful for the network, it was cancelled shortly after the lawsuit. While it is widely believed that being ethical and sticking to one’s values will lead to an honorable and decent career, the examples illustrated above show that more and more people are willing to push the envelope of professional values and ethics. Personal gain has taken a back seat to deceny and commen sense in many professions. This leaves us with an urgent and pressing question-what are professional ethics and values worth today.

References

1. Values and Ethics. (n. d. ). Strategic Leadership and Decision Making. Retrieved from http://www. au. af. mil/au/awc/awcgate/ndu/strat-ldr-dm/pt4ch15. html
2. Values, Morals and Ethics. (n. d. ). Changing minds and persuasion — How we change what others think, believe, feel and do. Retrieved from http://changingminds. org/explanations/values/values_morals_ethics. tm
3. United States Department of Labor. (n. d). OSHA. Retrieved from http://www. osha. gov/oshinfo/mission. html
4. Madsen, P. , & Shafritz, J. M. (1990). Essentials of Business Ethics. New York, New York: Penguin
5. Group Society of Professional Journalist. (1996). Code of Ethics. Retrieved from http://www. spj. org/ethicscode. asp
6. Bennett, J. (2008, May). Picture Perfect. Newsweek, (), . Shea, D. (2008). The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www. huffingtonpost. com/2008/06/25/nbc-settles-to-catch-a-pr_n_109261. html

As a supporter of the idea, genetically modified babies will n t only improve newborn children’s health from diseases, but also have the specifications to c hang certain features of the child. Modifying babies sounds like such a farfetched futuristic idea, when in reality, today is the future. The technology is all here, and if we don’t utilize the sees advancements now while we have them, we may never get a chance to do so. With the practice CE of genetically modified babies, life will improve for the future.

Genetically Modified Babies will improve human health and prevent many disc eases. With much conducted research and such little testing, the scientific community states that “genetic screening on embryos has potential to wipe out genetic disease by vi ritually removing the alleles from such disorders. When it is used in correct form[… ] children boo run in the future Amoral 2 have the potentially to be purely ‘healthy” and carry no signs of genetic disease With the use of genetic screening, diseases caused by mutated genes or family pas seed genes could be cured.

Disorders like Down syndrome, Color blindness, sickles disease, cystic c fibrosis, and Tussahs disease could all be cured and stopped, by using genetic screening. With Designer Babies, families will have a benefit in the family health line from each generate on. Families would also have better reproduction of healthier offspring because of it. With the practice of genetically modified babies, life will improve for the future. With using the technology that comes from Genetically Modified Babies, these newborns will be more improved and advanced over time.

Eventually, these babies will be more smarter and intellectually intelligent than naturally babies. It is estimated that the n ewe genetically modified babies will live close to 20 years longer than us. Some crazy phenol eons state that unethically modified babies will lead to a new “super human” breed Of living 0 organisms. There is nothing wrong ” [… ]with the attempt to make our children smarter or kinder,’ Steinbeck told Live Science. ‘If we did think that was wrong, we should give up parenting, and put them out on the street. “(Steinbeck) No parent would ever leave their child out on the street et, especially if they were more smarter and kinder than a regular newborn . With the practice of genetically modified babies, life will improve for the future. How would the future look for Designer Babies? Well, there would be a regime of technological consumer eugenics, that would benefit society as a whole. If the FDA says yes to the practice, it would be the first time a government body has supported Chain gees for humans and Amoral 3 their ascending generations.

From my research, I’ve seen that the FDA commit tee is considering an okay in the scientific issues of the idea, however for such uses of emoticon drill manipulation and “designer” babies they’re still spectacle. With the practice Of genetically m edified babies, life will improve for the future. Genetically Modified Babies, will help prevent genetic diseases and make a gar at future for the world. However, there is a lot of down faults. What if the there is a mall function in the medical process of genetic engineering, also in the designer babies process the e child can come out wrong or not how the parent wanted it.

Another detriment to genetically modified babies is that these absurd theories could be true and cause humans to be inferior to t hose babies, once their race grows and develops with time. Lets look at the facts here, Genetically y modified babies, are good for stopping genetic mutations and providing health, the offspring w al improve, and it will create a new future towards life on this planet. Many people disagree, but I support the FDA in that they will decide to use the is practice everywhere and utilize this country technology.

Genetically modified babies will increase health of the world and also bring new scientific and medical advancements. Diseases that are killing people now, will be wiped out of the human race if we had genetic engine nearing in years to come. As a society, we are forced to do the most best thing for us, and as huh mans we learn that “new’ is better. Once we start advancing and tinkering with technology, we re like that it can help us with survival and the human condition on this planet.

Describe the social implications of business ethics facing a selected business in its different areas of activity. (PA and MM) Social Implications of business ethics The social Implications often refer to those businesses that have an effect on society as a whole. They can relate too number of areas of activity. I will now talk about the areas of activity. Areas of activity Ethics in finance In financial dealing and payments there are many kinds of unethical behavior, however there are regulations and voluntary codes that try to make sure that ethical practices are monitored.

There are many businesses these days In the financial sector, which offer loans to borrower. These loans are expensive to repay, which results in even worse debt for the borrower. Ethics in finance is always an area with a great deal of scope for unethical behavior. The primary purpose of free enterprise is to generate profit. Free enterprise is an economic system in which people are free to offer goods and services to meet demands.

There are a number of areas In financial affairs where unethical behavior arise; for example: Bribery: Bribery Is the act of taking or receiving something with the Intention of Influencing the recipient in some way favorable to the party providing the bribe. Bribery is illegal and can be punishable, either by Jail time or hefty fines. Bribery is also a form of corruption, the reason it is a form of corruption is because you have the use of financial muscle to gain unfair advantage over others.

For example attempting to gain decorating permission by giving money to a decorating official/councilor. Another example of bribery Is giving money to someone to change decision making, to help you and gain a better advantage. Insider trading: Insider trading Is a very bad unethical behavior; it is an illegal practice of trading on the stock exchange to one’s wan advantage through having access to confidential information. An example of insider trading is when a company takeover bid is imminent; shares are rapidly bought up then sold at a big profit.

Insider trading is detected by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). In the united States and by the securities and investment board (SIB) In the united Kingdom. These agencies do not have any legal powers other than public disclosure, nor can they bring prosecutions themselves. Lobbying: Lobbing is the act of attempting to influence business and government leaders to create legislation or conduct an activity that will help a particular organization. People who do these types of activities are called lobbyists.

The main intention for lobbyists is to persuade politicians to adopt a particular cause or Issues, in order to benefit It. For example If a particular company was under pressure to take gain influence over policies. The reason lobbying is an unethical behavior is because lobbyists can be a source of corruption. Ethics in human resource management The Job of human resource management is the process of hiring and developing employees so that they can become more useful and valuable to the business.

Human resource management can include planning personal needs, recruiting the right people for the Job, conducting Job analyses, orienting and training, salaries and managing wages, providing benefits and incentives, evaluating performance, resolving disputes and communicating with all employees at all levels. The ethics in human resource management is to ensure that when Jobs are advertised, there is no discrimination. Everyone is entitled to feel that a Job selection is made on the basis of merit rather than on the basis of race, nationality, gender or other unfair groups.

Human resources professional are trained specifically to avoid discrimination of all kinds. Ethics in production Ethics in production is becoming a major concern within the United Kingdom; the production of goods can lead to ethical problems for a business. The number of live experiments in Britain has halved in the last 30 years, due to an ethical concern. There are many examples, for instance animal testing, around the world animals are being used to help in the development of new products ranging from shampoo to new cancer drugs.

There is a new British law that requires that any new drug must e tested on at least two different species of live mammal. One must be a large non- rodent. There is The Animals Act 1986 insists that no animal experiments should be conducted if there is a realistic alternative. Before some medical treatment was tested in humans, but now that has stopped and it is not being tested on animals. Animals were used to develop anesthetics to prevent human pain and suffering during surgery. The main ethical question which is being asked, is the value of human life in relation to animals the same.

There are also question about the extent to which animals suffer during these test. Ethics in sales and marketing There are various way a business can employ unethical means to try and generate sales. There are three main ways and they are:  Spamming: spamming refers to sending emails to thousands of users similar to a chain letter. It is possible to have some email systems which have the ability to block incoming mail from a specific address, but because these individuals regularly change their email address it is difficult to prevent some spam from reaching an email box. Spoofing: When an email appears to have been originated from one source, but they were actually sent room another. People who send Junk or spam emails typically want the email to appear as though it is from a real address, but on most occasions they may not really exist. The reason why they do this is because the email cannot be traced back to the originator. 3Raising their own status: Either employees of the business pretending They place false recommendations or blobs onto a weapon. People who engage in this type of activity are known as ‘shills’.

The reason they do this is online consumers are being conned into believing that legitimate consumers are recommending a reduce, when really they know nothing about the product and are giving false information. Ethics in intellectual property There is an intellectual property law that allows people to own their creative work the same way that they can own their physical property. The reason they want to own their intellectual property is because the owner of intellectual property can control and be rewarded for its use. This also encourages further innovation and creativity to the benefit of everyone.

There are four main types of intellectual property and they are:  Patents for innovation . Trade marks for brand identity . Designs for product appearance . Copyright for material The reason why many businesses such as music record label companies, and software companies use these different types of intellectual property is that they put a lot of invested time, resources, talents and money into creating something useful and enjoyable for others, they have the rights to protect it from being stolen or misused by other people. What is franking?

Franking is the process of drilling down into the earth before a high-pressure water mixture is directed at the rock to release the gas inside. Water, sand and chemicals re injected into the rock at high pressure which allows the gas to flow out to the head of the well. Hydraulic fracturing, or franking, is a technique designed to recover gas and oil from shale rock The process is carried out vertically or, more commonly, by drilling horizontally to the rock layer. The process can create new pathways to release gas or can be used to extend existing channels.

What are the advantages of franking? The advantages of franking are that it allows drilling firms to access difficult to reach resources of oil and gas. Franking has happened in the United States, and it has significantly boosted domestic oil production and reduced gas prices. The main half the CO emissions of coal. Places such as United States and Canada have received gas security for about 100 years. The industry suggests franking of shale gas could contribute significantly to the Auk’s future energy needs. Why is it controversial?

Franking has been carried out in the United States, it has become a huge success but the main reason why people think it is controversial is because it has a huge impact on the environment and the concerns on the environment. The first reason why it is introversion is that franking uses huge amounts of water that must be transported to the franking site, at significant environmental costs. The second main concern is that there is a chance that a potential carcinogenic chemical use may escape and contaminate the ground water around the franking site. This is really bad, as franking could lead to polluting our water which we need to drink.

People who live around the areas not only are it damaging their environment but it is also affecting their health. There are also concerns that the franking process can cause small earth tremors. There was an incident that hit the Blackball area in 2011, this was due to franking. There were two small earthquakes; the first earthquake was at 1. 5 magnitudes and the second earthquake was at 2. 2 magnitudes. A processor at the University of Manchester said “It’s always recognized as a potential hazard of the technique” “But they’re unlikely to be felt by many people and very unlikely to cause any damage. Environmental campaigners say “franking is simply distracting energy firms and governments from investing in renewable sources of energy, and encouraging continued reliance on fossil fuels. “Shale gas is not the solution to the Auk’s energy challenges”, this was said by ‘Friends of the Earth energy campaigner Tony Bowwow’s, he also commented “we need a 21st century energy revolution based on efficiency and renewable, not more fossil fuels that will add to climate change. List of Franking companies within the I-J: Clique Energies Sensors Alkaline Third Energy Rattling Energy Northrop Quadrille Resources Research Europe Oil Coastal Oil Gas Moorland Energy ‘gas Pal. Warwick Energy Magellan Petroleum Outline the concept of tax avoidance and its wider implications I will be talking about woo business firms, the two firms I have chosen are Cutbacks and Google. These two firms have not been avoiding paying tax on their British sales. This has a big impact, Cutbacks have made a lot of sales within the I-J, within the last year, and they had made sales of IEEE million.

They made so much money but paid no corporation tax. According to the BBC Cutbacks had transferred some money to a Dutch sister company in royalty payments, they bought coffee beans from Switzerland and paid high interest rates to borrow from other parts of the business. Google also did the name thing, they also try to avoid corporation tax, Google made a turnover of IEEE million. Google only paid E million to the Treasury in 2011. Such as Google and Cutbacks is avoidance and not evasion.

Google and Cutbacks are two big businesses where a lot of customers are disappointed. One person who was 45 years old, was self-employed businessman named Mike Bucker’s, from Manchester. He was really disappointed and furious with what these two companies did. He said “Vie installed Google Chrome and changed my search engine on all my home computers. If I want a coffee I am going to go to Costa, despite Cutbacks Ewing nearer to me, and even though I buy a lot of things online, I am not using Amazon. He also commented, “I’m sick of the ‘change the law’ comments, I can vote with my feet, I feel very passionate about this because at one point in my life I was a top rate tax payer and I paid my tax in full. ” As you can see from his comments he is very upset and disappointed with these companies, for doing what they have done. I also believe that it is not fair and morally right, as why should these big companies who make millions of pounds be able to get away with paying tax, whereas there are people who have been working their whole life who have been paying corporation tax.

As the public have got to understand better what corporate tax avoidance is, there is a clear sense of outrage that is going well beyond a small group of protesters, it’s something that the public feels is really not right with the current system. Compare the case of individual Chris Moles admitting to tax avoidance with the case of Cutbacks coffee company. Does the ethically principle differ between and individual an organization? “Chris Moles admits Joining tax avoidance scheme that would have cost the UK

Multimillion” This was the headline that shocked a lot of people. Chris Moles and two other men took part in a scheme called “working wheels” which counted “450 fund managers and celebrities” as members Chris Moles admits to Joining a tax avoidance scheme that would have cost the UK Multimillion. It wasn’t only Chris Moles there was also a former Radio 1 DC who pretended to be a used car salesman hit by losses to save up to El million in tax payments. The guy Joined a scheme called Working Wheels’ which boasted 450 high earning members, including celebrities.

Abstract

Ethics is critical for the success of business. Organizations and businesses strive to develop and implement sound ethical strategies as a part of their promotion campaigns. Present day consumers know what stands behind ethical rules in business; they are more cautious in their desire to disclose private information; they look for confidentiality, sustainability, and respect. With the rapid technological advancement and with the emergence of the new e-business concepts, traditional understanding of ground rules of ethics has undergone a strategic shift: online businesses have revealed the extreme flexibility of ground ethical rules in business – the flexibility that makes these rules change under the pressure of the volatile business environments.

Introduction

Ethics is critical for the success of business. Organizations and businesses strive to develop and implement sound ethical strategies as a part of their promotion campaigns. Present day consumers know what stands behind ethical rules in business; they are more cautious in their desire to disclose private information; they look for confidentiality, sustainability, and respect. With the rapid technological advancement and with the emergence of the new e-business concepts, traditional understanding of ground rules of ethics has undergone a strategic shift: online businesses have revealed the extreme flexibility of ground ethical rules in business – the flexibility that makes these rules change under the pressure of the volatile business environments.

Ground rules, confidentiality, and California privacy policy law

The concept of privacy is the source of major controversies in business ethics. Privacy and confidentiality are just some out of many ground rules, which we learn to respect since childhood. Under the impact of technological advancement, and with the growing share of e-business markets, the ground rules in ethics have been expanded to ensure that customers feel secure and safe when using the benefits of online business. Now, privacy is the effective instrument used by online businesses to develop and maintain trust among customers; finally, privacy is the reliable foundation for ethical continuity in business and management (IBM Global Services, 2001; Hamelink, 2000).

With the growing need for better privacy, California has adopted a new privacy law that came into force on July 1, 2004, “demanding that all commercial web sites that collect ‘personally identifiable information’ from users in California must now have a conspicuous privacy policy on their web sites – even if based overseas” (Out-Law News, 2004). The new California Online Privacy Protection Act has completely changed the vision of privacy online: websites had to change their traditional approaches to privacy, to ensure that all Californian residents signing up to their products or services were protected from privacy breaches.

Although the majority of online communities have subsequently reconsidered their attitudes to privacy, that was not the case with Google. For more than 3 years, Google was persistently ignoring public claims and calls to provide a privacy policy link on its homepage. For some unknown reason, Google was confident that its users had easy access to the company’s privacy policy, and viewed privacy as the secondary element of successful online business performance. As one of the major business providers online, Google was expected to exemplify flexibility and responsibility in terms of privacy policy changes in California; yet, the company appeared to be the last to “place the word ‘privacy’ on the Google.com web page” (Espiner, 2008).

Long as Google’s path to ethical self-realization has been, it signifies the flexibility of ground rules of ethics as such, and the changeability and flexibility of ethical policies and beliefs, when pressured by changes in law. Objectively, before placing the ‘privacy’ link on its homepage, Google has gone through several stages of Kohlberg’s moral reasoning – from simplified ‘good-bad’ idea of business ethics to the recognition of universally accepted societal norms.

At the earlier stages of the company’s ethical evolution, Google’s relations with the public resembled a marketplace (University of South Maine, 2008), where any changes or ethical initiatives had to be the source of material gain; otherwise, the importance and relevance of such initiatives for Google was almost zeroed. With time, the company’s attitudes to privacy have been gradually transformed to form a reasonable balance between law and order. At that stage of moral maturity, Google had to recognize the dominance and objective superiority of laws over the company’s narrow views on ground ethical rules.

Under the pressure of the law and the public, Google has come to realize the essence of the so-called “social contract” (Windsor & Cappel, 1999): the company had but to accept the relevance and importance of ethical rules, which had been agreed upon by society. Finally, Google had to admit the importance and relevance of privacy as a universally accepted ethical norm in business.

Surprisingly or not, but the changes in Google’s approaches to privacy did not happen as a result of changes in Californian privacy law. Rather, Google had to review its ethical beliefs under the growing pressure of ethically conscious organizations and individuals. The story of Google’s journey to ethical excellence shows that ground ethical rules do change under the impact of the public.

Google’s reluctance to place a privacy policy link on its homepage suggests that the public may appear a more powerful force in the fight for flexibility of ethical approaches and compliance. Moreover, Google’s long way to accepting and fulfilling legal requirements reveals the essence of ground ethical rules’ dynamics in virtual marketplaces. In case of Google, legal (and actually, ethical) compliance has become a least-evil measure that helped the company avoid serious legal consequences, and has subsequently formed the basis for in-depth review of its faulty ethical beliefs in business.

Conclusion

Kohlberg suggests that in the process of ethical maturation, businesses and individuals go through the six different stages of moral reasoning (University of South Maine, 2008). Those, who view the world through the oversimplified prism of “bad vs. good”, finally come to realize the importance of universally accepted norms that form the basis for successful business performance.

The case of Google reveals the hidden facets of ground ethical rules’ dynamics in present day business. Ground ethical rules become more flexible under the pressure of legal and ethical changes. Although many companies use legal and ethical compliance as a least-evil measure for avoiding serious legal consequences, this compliance is the key to in-depth review of ethical norms and gradual recognition of privacy as the key to successful organizational performance in online business.

References

1. Espiner, T. (2008). Campaigners call for Google privacy policy link. ZDNet Asia. Retrieved
2. December 27, 2008 from http://www.zdnetasia.com/news/internet/0,39044908,62042299,00.htm
3. Hamelink, C.J. (2000). The ethics of cyberspace. SAGE.
4. IBM Global Services. (2001). Enterprise privacy architecture: securing returns on e-business.
5. Retrieved December 27, 2008 from http://www-935.ibm.com/services/ph/bcs/pdf/g510-1913-enterprise-privacy-architecture.pdf
6. Out-Law. (2004). California’s privacy policy law affects us all. Out-Law.com. Retrieved
7. December 27, 2008 from http://www.out-law.com/page-4759
8. University of South Maine. (2008). Kohlberg’s three levels and six stages of moral reasoning.
9. Retrieved December 27, 2008 from http://students.usm.maine.edu/bmcpha61/Kohlberg_stages_of_morality.htm
10. Windsor, J.C. & Cappel, J.J. (1999). A comparative study of moral reasoning. College
11. Student Journal, 33: 129-142.  

The investigation found senior SYNC executives guilty of breaching the firms’ code of ethics and charged them with bribery, money laundering and fraud amounting to over $56 million. More specifically, Mr. Pierre Daytime, Zinc’s president, and Mr. Riyadh Ben Sass, a former executive vice president, were accused of secretly funneling company money to Labia’s Gadding family in order to secure projects in Libya and subsequently strengthen Zinc’s presence in North Africa.

Ethical Model

The primary ethical question that is to be addressed is: “Is it acceptable for Canadian companies to engage in facilitation payments to gain business in developing nations? ” The active agents are Zinc’s senior management, who knowingly participated in blatant acts of bribery and fraud, as well as the Libyan facilitation agents. I will analyze SYNC Lapin’s actions using the utilitarianism model. The theory of Utilitarianism states that people should act in a manner that maximizes the total, collective utility of their actions. Zinc’s senior management would argue that they had to maximize shareholder value in order to maximize the total collective utility. Sing this OIC, the senior management felt it was important that they sourced work in all possible regions, in order to beef up their portfolio of projects. The senior management then expected this to directly translate into improved profits and higher share prices that would make shareholders and the board of directors happy. However, the senior management was also aware that certain nations, such as Libya, demanded facilitation payments for awarding projects in their countries. The management also knew that these payments were considered to be bribes and that they are deemed illegal in Scandal.

While these measures resulted in an 87% appreciation in share price in the short run, Zinc’s stock then proceeded to nose dive to a low of $35 once news of the bribery broke out. This dramatic fall in share price was almost completely attributable to the negative emotion towards and loss Of reputation suffered by SYNC Laving as a direct result of their decision to engage in bribery. These executives did not account for the significance of upholding their firms’ reputation before providing facilitation payments.

Moreover, as a result of their fraudulent behavior, SYNC is now also prohibited from undertaking projects funded by the World Bank for 10 years Consequently, contrary to senior managements’ intentions, SYNC suffered a reduction in share price combined with a loss in reputation. The above facts prove that Zinc’s management did not maximize the collective utility of their shareholders but rather proceeded to ruin their reputation by partaking in actions of bribery. The above analysis clearly shows that SYNC failed to do good by its shareholders by engaging in facilitation payments.

It is also important to consider and evaluate Syncs alternatives to bribery in this case. Bribes tend to have different definitions depending on the part of the world you are dealing with. While these bribes (aka facilitation payments) are considered a part of doing business in developing nations, such as Libya, they are illegal in Canada. An interesting perspective was raised in class defending Zinc’s actions. What if Syncs facilitation payments were being used to build basic infrastructure and provide basic amenities such as schools and hospitals in the developing nation?

This now raises the question as to whether facilitation payments are acceptable based on the activities being funded by these bribes. A number of valuable points were raised in class both defending and abhorring SYNC Lapin’s actions. I am of the perspective that companies must always adhere to the stricter of their country or the country where they are doing business’ rules as a guide for making ethical decisions. Consequently, I believe that firms should not elect to work in regions where they are forced to bribe local officials to gain projects.

Moreover, having irked as a project engineer at a competing engineering and construction firm, know that my company refused to do business in countries, such as Libya, where bribery was a requirement to gain projects. Our senior management and C-level executives were sticklers for winning and executing projects based on a fair and competitive bidding process that ensured the best candidate was awarded the contract. While this approach to decision-making might cause companies to lose out on certain projects, It will ensure that the firm’s reputation is never tarnished.

In the long run, company reputation, while being a “soft” measure, is one of the key factors in ensuring sustainability. Many world-renowned companies have refused to pay bribes in foreign countries and have still managed to attain burgeoning profits while maintain a sterling reputation. For example, Shell refused to pay Venezuelan officials $35 million to maintain their license over a nickel mine It is interesting to note that Shell still owns and operates this mine in Venezuela and have never been threatened with any such facilitation payments since.

This report was produced to analyze the business ethics of Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC). First, the report started with a brief description on the company background. Next, it is continued with identification of the ethical dilemmas – poor quality products, animal abuse and poor working condition of KFC, provided from stakeholder analysis and examples from their history. After that, the report moved on to the importance of the mentioned ethical dilemmas and how KFC is dealing with it. The actions taken are product quality improvement, animal welfare issues and establish union.

This included the application of the various ethical theories. Then, it is continued with the good side of KFC when the analysis was done on KFC best practices and values that KFC are practicing. It included Corporate Social Value (CSR) where they offered ‘Projek Penyayang KFC’ in Malaysia and Colonel’s Scholar Program, practicing the value of hope and love; and established supplier code of conduct by practicing the value of justice. Further, the author put on suitable recommendations for KFC such as Go for Organic, with the hope that the plan recommended can help KFC in expanding their business towards a brighter future.

Lastly, this report was closed up with a conclusion justifying the essentialness of business ethics. KFC, founded and also known as Kentucky Fried Chicken, is a chain of fast food restaurants based in Louisville, Kentucky and is now one of the well-known fast food restaurants which operates in more than 11,000 branches in more than 80 nations and territories throughout the world. Examples are UK, China, Thailand, Malaysia, Kuwait, Spain and Barbados, Puerto Rico, Pakistan and many more.

KFC started with Colonel Harland Sanders who grew up to become a personage the world known as Colonel Sanders throughout the years, discovered his penchant for cooking when he was only 9 years old. KFC is now regarded as the most chicken restaurant chain providing a special mouth watering taste fried chicken that cannot be replaced with chicken’s natural juices sealed-in; leaving KFC with pride as a fast-food restaurant that provide customers with a selection of home-styled side dishes and desserts such as coleslaw and ice-creams to make a wholesome, complete and satisfying meal despite only serving great tasting chicken. According to Lee Flamand (eHow, 2011), “an ethical dilemma is a situation wherein moral precepts or ethical obligations conflict in such a way that any possible resolution to the dilemma is morally intolerable. In other words, an ethical dilemma is any situation in which guiding moral principles cannot determine which course of action is right or wrong. ”The competition between fast food restaurants is increasing where KFC have to come out with more choices of selection to meet the demand of their patrons.

At the same time, they have to think of ways to make more sales, cut costs, and basically maximize the profits of the firms and faced many ethical dilemmas concerning their products and consumers during the process. The ethical dilemmas include poor quality products, animal abuse and poor working conditions. David Ludwig (2009), director of a Boston children’s hospital said that “fast-food consumption has been shown to increase calorie intake, promote weight gain, and elevate risk for diabetes” .

Fast Food is usually unhealthy, and can often lead to loyal consumers having weight problems. This matter got worst to KFC where in year 2006, KFC was being sued for frying its chicken with cooking oils that contain Trans-fats, which can contribute to heart disease and diabetes. According to Mayo Clinic, trans fat is also called trans-fatty acids and assumed by some doctors to be the worst type of fat which both raises “bad” (LDL) cholesterol and lowers “good” (HDL) cholesterol. A high LDL cholesterol level in combination with a low HDL cholesterol level increases the risk of getting heart disease . Trans fat is bad that it boosts the risk of coronary disease and people should only consume no more than 2 g per day. However, KFC claimed its products “meet or exceed all government regulations. ” But as the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the activist group behind the lawsuit, points out, a three-piece extra-crispy combo meal, which is called ‘dinner-plate’ in Malaysia, contains 15 g of trans fat which is more than a person should ingest (Time magazine, 2006).

In China, some of the outlets in Xianyang city were being accused for using the same frying oil to fry chickens up to 10 days and this can cause cancer . Furthermore, other examples such as: customers cut her tongue and mouth after plastic was been found when she consumed coleslaw, bloody bandage found under KFC baked beans, worms discover in sandwiches, children became sick after eating KFC in Colorado, proved that KFC poor quality products issue has achieving a very dangerous level . Added on, some KFC outlets were even forced to pay compensation for injuries.

Example: KFC in Plymouth has been fined $13,000 for selling raw chicken to their customers . In year 2009, KFC in central London faced food hygiene charges with the cases where countless sighting of cockroaches, mice, rats and flies flying ahead was found when an investigation was done in the city. The owner has been fined ? 20,000 and was asked for temporary shop closed down.

Since the late 1990s, KFC faced severe protests by People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), an animal rights protection organization. The improper breeding of birds combined with improper working conditions of workers and lack of ethically efficient operation processes led to improper practices in KFC’s supplier’s poultry farms. According to Donald G. McNeil Jr. who published his article in New York Times in 2004, “an animal rights group involved in a long legal dispute with KFC released a videotape showing slaughterhouse workers for one supplier jumping up and down on live chickens, drop-kicking them like footballs and slamming them into walls, apparently for fun”.

Furthermore, other acts of cruelty which include suffocating a chicken by tying a latex glove over its head, workers tearing beaks off, spitting tobacco juice into birds’ mouths, ripping a bird’s head off to write graffiti in blood, plucking feathers to “make it snow,” and squeezing birds like water balloons to spray feces over other birds were all saw by an under investigator who works for the company . KFC suppliers even cram birds into huge waste-filled factories, breed and drug them to grow so large until the chicken could not even walk, and often break their wings and legs. The chickens’ throats were slit and they were dropped into tanks of scalding-hot water often while they were still conscious during slaughtering process . As a result KFC was accused of animal abuse by PETA, on the supplier’s farm.

Poor working conditions is always an issue for KFC especially for the branches located in big countries such US, India and China. In US, workers in Pilgrim’s Pride Poultry farm did animal abused action just to alleviate boredom or vent frustrations especially when so many chickens were coming in that they would have to work late . On the other hand, according to the city government of Guangzhou, China; effective from January 1 year 2006, the minimum wage for part-time labor set by local regulations is at 7. 5 Yuan per hour in big cities such as Guangzhou but KFC only paid them with 5. 5 Yuan. KFC were bombarded for this contract as it had violated the legal rights of employees. KFC allegedly force part-time employees to work the same hours as full-time staff but fail to pay them any of the benefits to which full-time staff are entitled.

Adding on, employees who work more than five hours a day and 30 hours a week should be treated as full-time staff and receive the same fringe benefits according to the mainland laws. However, the Guangdong labor authority’s clarification indicates that part-time working students are not protected by the law, which is a relief for the employers involved. It was extremely unfair for those part-timers (China Business, 2006).

According to De George, R. T. who has written in his book entitled ‘Business Ethics (5th Edition) in year 1999, he declares that an ethical dilemma occurs when the choice is defined unclearly between alternative actions with moral content. Whether a specific behavior is right or wrong, ethical or unethical is often determined by the concerned stakeholders and an individual’s personal ethics. As a result, values, judgments, and complex situations all play a critical role in ethical decision making.

The reason KFC using trans oil at first because the food produced is much tastier. Trans oil which is introduced in 1990’s, claims that it is suitable to substitute natural oil and healthy. It has better performances under high heat, longer shelf life and also it is cheaper . For example: The crispy fried chicken is resulted crispier when frying with trans oil. Here, it is very clear that KFC has a bad judgment in choosing the types of oil to be used and caused them being sued on their judgment.

KFC also react as activist stakeholder where by using trans oil which is cheaper, they believe their investment will giving them a good return in profit. In these new era with full of busyness and stressful lifestyle, so as dual-working families where both parents are forced to work to increase the income of a family, more and more people are fully dependent on quick meal solutions and most will opt for fast food. Fast food such as KFC is not only a fast food restaurant, but the brand- KFC and their products have highly encounter a place in everyone’s life as it really helps in saving a meal-preparation time.

Although people start to be more health conscious of having good health and body figures, fast food especially KFC may cause obesity according to research. Health Organizations in most development countries such as U. S, and U. K, have started to encourage their citizens to concern more about their having healthy life by having nutritious meal. Since KFC started their operations and expanded their business globally, the ‘chicken-meal’ they offered, only gains a bad image and reputation of a fast food that provides greasy unhealthy food.

Fast food has the potential to impact directly and visibly on people’s well-being like obesity. With this case, KFC practice the theory of utilitarianism which is also called ‘the greatest happiness principle’ where they have taken an action which results greatest amount of people receiving the greatest amount of good. So, KFC came out with Kentucky Grilled Chicken which is marinated with savory blend of secret herbs and slow-grilled to juicy perfection. This new product has fewer fat grams, fewer calories, and less sodium than original recipe chicken.

Besides, all KFC chicken products practice Zero Grams Trans Fat per serving where they have found the perfect recipe by incorporating the Colonel’s 11 herbs and spices with a new cooking oil that contains zero grams of trans fat. Beside fried chicken, many others favorite KFC side dishes such as mashed potatoes and wages are now served with zero grams of trans fat . KFC’s new products and Zero Grams Trans Fat plans have help them to push up their brand where they tend to promote happiness through serving customers with nutrient food and it is also a better option for health-conscious customers.

According to Brooks and Dunn (2009), ‘The ethically correct action is the one that will produce the greatest amount of pleasure or the least amount of pain. ’ Since the case of animal abuse being explored to the world, KFC faced the toughest challenge in where it heated up the public awareness towards the animal welfare. People all around the world started to be concerned about this issue as KFC has their branches worldwide. Animal abuse case occurred huge ruckus by the public has caused the corporation to lose their image and their reputations are highly damaged because of the law stated by PETA.

After the incident, stakeholder’s expectations and demands regarding the standardized guidelines of animal treatment were also increased. The case not only affected the business all over the world, but also its brand (KFC) reputation, turnover and profit as KFC has their branches in most of the countries and hence, caused the significant impacts on the relationship between contemporary organization such as McDonald, Burger King, Wendy and Safe-way as they also afraid that KFC might drag them down, their shareholders such as the owners of each KFC branch restaurants and finally public opinion.

Just like other fast food chain, KFC seems trying to minimize their budget and hence maximize their profits without considering their suppliers and customers instead they should put on priority on the importance of ethics. Suppliers just did what requested by KFC without thinking their negative impacts when requisition for chicken’s meat increased. Here, KFC react brilliantly where they did not run away from reality as several actions had been taken to overcome the problems and tried to make the issue – a ‘learning’ history for all.

KFC took an immediate responds and developed a series of plan to overcome the problems and this action has become a trend for KFC in the future. When receiving a little pressure from PETA, KFC Canada agreed to a historic new animal welfare plan that they became the first major restaurant chain ever in whole world to purchase all of its meat exclusively from controlled-atmosphere killing (CAK) slaughterhouses and dramatically the lives and deaths of millions of chickens for Canada. CAK is a method of slaughtering poultry where chickens do not suffer when being removed from the crates, hung upside down, shackled, bled, and scalded in defeathering tanks which leads to struggling, stress, and broken wings. The processes work the oxygen in the transport cages is replaced with other gasses such as carbon dioxide, argon or nitrogen to gently put them into ‘sleeping mode’.

The birds die from the lack of oxygen, and are dead before they are ever handled by slaughterhouse workers . Besides, there are no chances for workers to abuse the chicken as they never have to chance to handle live chickens in CAK. This process even provide with better results when workers do not need to struggle with flapping, scratching, vomiting, and defecating chickens, lights can be kept bright throughout the process and the air maintain at its cleanliness level .

As stated clearly in KFC main website, all suppliers must comply with the KFC policy which is they are strictly not allowed to use hormones and steroids for any purposes, including improving growth in chickens due to the genetically engineered for faster growth and antibiotics are strictly prohibited. To show their sincerity in transformation, KFC even formed the KFC Animal Welfare Advisory Council, which consists of highly regarded experts in the field who will provide information and advice based on relevant data and scientific research which has been a key factor in formulating their animal welfare program.

To rebuild the public confidence towards KFC, the company allowed PETA to review its animal welfare audit forms every six months.  Employees play one of the most important characters in the whole process. Without these people, KFC might not have such a huge success in their business until today. After the incident of underpaying their part-time workers in Guangzhou, they set up trade union branches across the province.

This incident has highly touched up people awareness to protect human rights especially in China when media from Shanghai, Taiyuan, Tianjin, Fuzhou and Beijing reported similar findings and have caused uproar across China. Furthermore, the unfair treatment to employees increased when labor officials in Shanghai claimed that they have not found any regulations in KFC outlets as the rules in Shanghai do not apply to part-time or to student.

The unclear stipulations on the rights and benefits of part-time or student employees enable KFC to make use of the legal loopholes as all fast-food restaurants are profit-making enterprises that wish to earn more profits by taking advantage on their part-time employees. KFC practice the theory of egoism here as the company only care about themselves rather than considering about its’ employees profits. “Cheating part-time workers is also a common practice in the US because companies take advantage of the fact that most part-timers are young, inexperienced and lack representation.

These businesses should be required to adhere to the rules and regulations of the host country,” said TangXiaojing to China Daily in year 2007. This whole case also tells China and the world that people have to be aware of the unequal situation for laborers in China, and to wonder why the legislation is always so vulnerableIn return, KFC claimed that they would took things seriously by looking forward into the situations and will approached the local trade union of the city for guidance of set up the trade union.

KFC has applied the theories of fairness here where everyone has been free to receive rewards for their efforts, which is also known as procedural justice (Beauchamp ;amp; Bowie, 1997). The president of Yum Brands Inc promised that KFC will accept every statements ruling Chinese government makes over its alleged illegal exploitation of part-time staffs in China. And they would do whatever is requested by the trade union after they have concluded their investigations into the employment of KFC’s part-time workers.

Besides, trade union in several cities in China will work together with local labor and social security departments to investigate the entire fast food restaurants in China which were suspected to have similar unlawful behavior to protect the rights of employees. With the cooperation between KFC and members of All China Federation of Trade Union to establish KFC own union, the author believes the cases of unfair treatment to employees will be lowered and KFC branches in China will be the model for other KFC in other countries .

The brand KFC has been carved in people’s heart as one of the best fried chicken restaurant and in return, KFC participated themselves in CSR as CSR is all about how a company manages the business processes to produce an overall positive impact on society. KFC takes its CSR priority faithfully and makes a dedicated effort to fulfill its tasks in every area including the community, education, diversity, market place, workplace, and animal welfare which is also benefiting to all including its stakeholders.

CSR which is also claimed to be a marketing purpose is logically captured in the new definition of marketing answered by the American Marketing Association (2004) which stated “marketing is an organizational function and a set of processes for creating, communicating, and delivering value to customers and for managing customer relationships in ways that benefit the organization and its stakeholders”. KFC practiced the value of Hope and Love. In Malaysia, KFC Malaysia has set up ‘Projek Penyayang’ as appreciation for greatly support by the Malaysian. Project Penyayang’ which was founded in 1995, was purposely developed to provide food to a total of 80 homes every quarter to enable thousands of orphans and underprivileged to enjoy KFC meals. With a heart of caring, KFC fulfill the hope of orphans who wished to have KFC. ‘Tabung Penyayang KFC’ which is a unique fund representing a percentage of revenue generated from sales of KFC’s Kids’ Fun Meals was set as a charity fund to help children and needy through various CSR Program. Adding on, all the programs also included donation, charity, and organize open house dinner particularly to those less fortunate, elderly and orphaned .

Caring is about wanting another person to succeed and do well in life and their career. With a heart of caring, KFC cares about students education. KFC create a fund – Colonel’s Scholars, offering scholarships for entrepreneurial drive and strong perseverance high school seniors who need financial helps to support their school fees in their study career. Students who are selected will received up to $ 20,000 to receive a bachelor degree program in the university the students have chosen inside their cities only .  KFC practice the value of justice where they protect the rights and punish the wrongs. Supplier code of conduct is established by KFC U. S. which is committed to protect all U. S. suppliers’ employees’ rights by conducting its business towards legal, ethical and socially responsible manner. All KFC suppliers are required to follow and abide by all applicable laws, codes or regulations which includes not limited to any local, state or federal laws regarding wages and benefits, employees’ compensation, working hours, equal opportunity, worker and product safety.

All suppliers are expected to confirm their practices to the published standards for their industry in order to get the contract to supply goods to KFC. Staffs of suppliers are protected in many areas where they must have safe and healthy working conditions and working schedules, non-discrimination occurs in industry, child labor issue where employees below 14 years old are strictly prohibited from working, forced and indentured labor and lastly notification to employees where notices of policies can be clearly explained to them.

With addition, suppliers who are failed to follow the Code may cause them to disciplinary action which might include the termination of the Supplier relationship with KFC. KFC pay full respect to all the employees as they work for suppliers who supply chicken meats and goods for KFC who claimed to be working indirectly for KFC.  Marketing strategy used to be very important in a business as a well-planned marketing strategy helps a business to earn more profitability, well-known brand mark and loyalty from customers.

As time goes by, marketing strategy cannot be dependent on just meeting the needs and demands of all stakeholders. KFC should now by right focus on how to deliver a better service and products’ quality to customers as the brand – KFC has already been recognized by everyone in the world. Emphasizes should be done on consumer health, products’ quality and social responsibility initiatives as people start conscious about having good health and enough nutrients. When people start going for organic, KFC should go for it too!

Organic products and other ingredients are grown without the use of pesticides, synthetic fertilizers, sewage sludge, genetically modified organisms, or ionizing radiation. Organic meat, poultry, eggs, and dairy products are come from animals such as chickens and cows that do not take antibiotics or growth hormones. Going for organic food products will increase the modal of production and it needs a long period of time for this huge transformation as there are few steps that have to be followed.

According to USDA National Organic Program (NOP), a Government-approved certifier will inspect the farm where the food is grown to make sure the farmer is following all the rules necessary to meet USDA organic standards before a product can be labeled “organic,”. Companies that handle or process organic food before it gets to your local supermarket or restaurant must be certified, too’.

On the other hand, it will be the hardest decision for KFC as they have to do surveys and further consideration whether the program is suitable for every KFC branches in the whole world as KFC have to reconsider about looking for new trustable suppliers that can continuously provide organic food and it is tough. KFC can always start slowly from the beginning by providing several choices from organic food such as organic salad, organic soya bean drink instead of carbonated flavored drinks, and mashed potatoes made from organic potatoes.

If the program run with success, KFC will become the first ever fast food chain that provides organic food products and the author strongly believes that the strategic planning will surely increase the sales of KFC and gaining more profit although KFC products will be sell at higher prices due to highly increased modal.

Conclusion

Conclusion, ethics is definitely necessary for a business to grow successfully, become more significant and more organized. A business can highly impact on the people’s lives and circumstances through providing jobs, life organization, creating wealth and inspiring others to grow their own business.

Therefore, the business maybe ruined and leaves it with a bad reputation if an organization is not having a proper understanding on business ethics. From bad to good, KFC has gone through every hard time and now moving towards a better future when they finally overcome most of its ethical issues. People do make mistakes and learn from mistakes so as KFC. KFC will learn from their mistakes and make the mistakes to the power of change. The author strongly believe that KFC will do their best in meeting everyone’s need and KFC will become the first priority for every human when they thinking of nice and tasty fried chicken.