TOWARD A
UNIVERSAL DECLARATION
OF ETHICAL
PRINCIPLES FOR PSYCHOLOGISTS
Progress Report Submitted to the Board of Directors
Of the International Association of
Applied Psychology
By Janel Gauthier, Ph.D. Chair of the
Ethics Committee
In 2002, the General Assembly of the International
Union of Psychological Science approved a motion to create an Ad Hoc Joint
Committee that would be responsible for developing a universal declaration of
ethical principles for psychologists. The initiative was to involve both the
International Union of Psychological Science (IUPsyS) and the International
Association of Applied Psychology (IAAP), with the understanding that the
International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology (IACCP) would be
invited to participate as well. A progress report was to be submitted to the
IAAP Board of Directors by the Chair of the working group in 2004.
Background
Psychology as an organized and a responsible
discipline develops codes of ethics to guide its members in behaving respectfully,
competently and appropriately when engaged in
research, teaching and practice. Some are based on clearly articulated
principles, values, and standards while others are based on rules, regulations,
and proscriptions/prescriptions.
There are tremendous variations in the form, the
content, the usefulness and the rate of development of codes of ethics in
psychology. For example, some codes provide a statement of moral principle that
helps the individual psychologist to resolve ethical dilemmas whereas others do
not. As a result, psychologists in different parts of the world are provided
with different levels of ethical support and guidance for their behavior. Furthermore, persons and peoples in these
parts are given different levels of protection from the misuse of psychology.
The need to support, facilitate and promote the
development of codes of ethics in the world was discussed at the biennial World
Forum of Psychology during the 25th International Congress of
Applied Psychology in
At the same congress, a proposal to develop a
universal declaration of ethical principles for psychologists was presented by
Professor Janel Gauthier at a symposium entitled “Professional Codes of Ethics
across National Boundaries: Seeking Common Ground.” It was brought to the
attention of IUPsyS and IAAP. A few days later, at the IUPsyS General Assembly,
Professor Gauthier introduced a motion to create a joint working group to
develop a universal declaration of ethical principles for psychologists. It was
approved unanimously. Professor Gauthier
was nominated to chair the working group on behalf of IUPsyS. As a member of
the Board of Directors of IAAP, and as Chair of its Committee on Ethics, he was
nominated by IAAP to be the liaison with IUPsyS.
The rationale for developing a universal declaration
of ethical principles for psychologists is at least two-fold: it would provide
a generic set of principles to develop and revise codes of ethics in
psychology, and a universal standard to measure achievement and progress in
psychological ethics throughout the world.
It is important to remember that the task of the
working group is to develop a universal declaration of ethical principles for
psychologists. It is not to develop a worldwide code of ethics or a code of
conduct that would be agreed upon and adhered to in all countries.
Perhaps a universal declaration of ethical principles
for psychologists could provide the foundation for developing a universal code
of ethics. However, a declaration of
ethical principles should
not to be confounded with a code of ethics or a code of conduct.
Codes of conduct define the bottom lines of professional conduct (i.e., what
you must or must not do). Codes of ethics tend to be more aspirational,
articulating standards according to underlying principles and values. A
declaration of ethical principles reflects the principles and values that would
be expected of a code of ethics or a code of conduct.
Membership
The current members of the Ad Hoc Joint Committee for
the Development of a Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for
Psychologists are:
·
Professor Janel Gauthier (
·
Professor Catherine Love (
·
Professor Elizabeth Nair (
·
Professor Paul B. Pederson (
·
Professor Tuomo Tikkanen (
·
Professor Kan Zhang (
All of them were invited to serve on the Committee on
the basis of their knowledge and expertise in the area of ethics or other areas
relevant to the development of a universal declaration of ethical principles
for psychologists.
There is a need to recruit one or two more members to
ensure representation from all five continents. Efforts are currently under way
to recruit someone from
The total number of members will remain deliberately
limited to keep to make it possible to work efficiently
as a group.
Summary of
Activities for 2002-2004
Since 2002, all of the activities of the Ad Hoc Joint
Committee have focused on the identification of a framework that could be used
to draft a universal declaration of ethical principles for psychologists. These activities could be summarized as
follows:
1) One major activity has involved reviewing some of
the most important or influential codes of ethics in psychology to identify the
ethical principles[1]
that have been used to develop them. Preference
was given to codes of ethics that clearly identified the principles used to
articulate standards of conduct to avoid inferences about the principles
underlying codes of ethics. So far, five codes of ethics involving three
different continents have been found to meet the criterion for review. These
are:
·
The Canadian Code of Ethics for
Psychologists of the Canadian Psychological Association (2001);
·
The Código Ético del
Psicólogo of the Sociedad Mexicana de
Psicología (2002);
·
The Code of Ethics for Psychologists Working in Aotearoa/New
·
The Ethical Principles of
Psychologists and Code of Conduct of the American Psychological Association
(2002);
·
The Meta-Code
of Ethics of the European Federation of Psychologists’ Associations (1995).
Comparisons between these codes have revealed that
the principles underlying them have a high level of commonality. As shown in
Table 1, the principles adopted to develop each of one these codes of ethics
are all highly congruent with one another.
Consequently, a generic set of fundamental principles was distilled from
these codes, which could be used as a framework to develop a universal
declaration of ethical principles for psychologists.
The following set of principles was found to best
capture the commonalties identified in the principles adopted by the codes of
ethics reviewed until now:
Þ
Respect for the dignity and rights of persons
Þ
Caring for others and concerns for their welfare
Þ
Competence
Þ
Integrity
Þ
Professional, scientific, and social responsibility
2) Another major activity has been to test the
universality of the moral principles underlying codes of ethics in
psychology. This was achieved by
comparing the codes of ethics in psychology and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and comparing the codes of
ethics in psychology and those in other disciplines such as sports and martial
arts.[2]
These comparisons have revealed that the moral
principles underlying professional ethics have a high level of universality. As shown in Table 2 and Table 3, the
principles adopted to develop codes of ethics in psychology are all highly
congruent with the moral imperatives underlying the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and codes of ethics in sports
(namely, coaching) and martial arts.
3) Another major activity has involved incorporating
into a framework, as shown in Table 4, the ethical principles and moral values
found to be most universal and best reflect the commonalties in the principles
used to develop codes of ethics in psychology. This framework has been
presented at international meetings as the proposed framework to develop a
universal declaration of ethical principles for psychologists.
Given the proposed framework, one could anticipate
that the resulting document would have a preamble followed by five sections,
each relating to one of the five ethical principles identified in Table 4. Each section would define the ethical
principle in a values statement that outlines the fundamental moral values contained
in the principle. However, it is too soon to tell what the final document will
look like as the proposed framework is still being discussed and analyzed.
4) Another major activity has involved presenting for
discussion and debates at international meetings the framework being proposed
to develop a universal declaration of ethical principles for
psychologists. For example, after the
International Congress of Applied Psychology in
Another exciting event was a well attended focus
group organized by Dr. Jean Pettifor to discuss the Feasibility of a Universal
Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists. It was also held during
the International Congress in
Activities
planned for 2004-2006
As a working group, the Ad Hoc Joint Committee will
be very active in the coming year. It will establish a means to keep people
informed and to seek feedback and advice from those who live and work in
different cultural settings. It will also begin to work on a draft of the
universal declaration of ethical principles for psychologists.
If everything unfolds according to plan, a complete
draft of the universal declaration will be available for discussion at the 2006
Board of Directors Meeting in
In the meantime, every effort will be made to consult
and seek advice from psychologists all over the world in order to arrive at a
draft that can be endorsed by all major international and national stakeholders
in psychology.
Comments
Naturally, to be of worldwide value in psychology, a universal
declaration of ethical principles for psychologists would have to be relevant to local communities and indigenous
values, and sensitive to national and
cultural differences. Many of the
codes analyzed so far have been North American/European in culture and, as
such, tend to emphasize individualism over family, community, and collective
good. For cultures that take a collectivist approach over an individual one,
there are implications for the interpretation of informed consent,
confidentiality, privacy, professional boundaries, and decision-making. Most certainly, an attempt to develop a
universal declaration of ethical principles for psychologists will require an
explicit statement regarding the role of community and culture in people’s
lives in order to obtain widespread support. A direction has been taken in the Code of Ethics for Psychologists Working in
Aotearoa/New Zealand (New Zealand Psychological Society, 2002) to address
the issue of balance between the individual and the communal. In this code, the ethical principle
pertaining to respect reads “Respect for the dignity of persons and peoples.”
Scholars who specialize in the philosophical underpinnings of the concept of
“human rights” would have a tough time with the addition of the word “peoples.”
Respect for peoples sometimes may be essential for respect for individuals in
order to counter discrimination that is based on individual membership in
specific people groups. However, all of
us have seen situations in which respect for peoples’ alleged cultural beliefs
has been used to justify harm to individuals.
Obviously, the development of a universal declaration of ethical principles for psychologists that is both aspirational and inspirational in its respect for the inherent dignity of all human beings will continue to be a challenge. However, I am confident that, as a discipline, we will succeed. More than meets the eye has been accomplished in the last two years. Still more will be achieved during the next two years. The project enjoys strong and enthusiastic support from all parts of the world and the members of the Ad Hoc Joint Committee are experienced and eager to contribute.
Special Thanks
This report would not be complete without expressing my warmest
gratitude to Dr. Jean Pettifor and Dr. Carole Sinclair who have generously
accepted to serve as my personal advisors for this project. Without their support and their guidance,
this project would not be where it is today.
I also wish to use this opportunity to thank all of those who have so
kindly accepted to serve on the Ad Hoc Joint Committee. Finally, my thanks go
to all of those who have provided me with feedback and encouragement to carry
on this very special and important project.
Janel Gauthier, Ph.D.
Chair of the Ad Hoc Joint Committee (IUPsyS/IAAP)
Chair of the Ethics Committee (IAAP)
Table
1. – Comparisons of the ethical principles used to develop the American
Psychological Association’s (APA’s)
Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, the Canadian
Psychological Association’s (CPA’s) Code
of Ethics for Psychologists, the European Federation of Psychologists
Associations’ (EFPA’s) Meta-Code of
Ethics, the Sociedad Mexicana de Psicología’s (SMP’s)
Código Ético del Psicólogo, and the
New Zealand Psychological Society’s (NZPS’s) Code of Ethics for Psychologists Working in Aotearoa/New
Zealand.
|
Ethical Principles |
APA’s (2002) |
CPA’s (2001) |
EFPA’s (1995) |
SMP’s (2002) |
NZPS’s (2002) |
|
Respect
for the dignity and rights of persons |
Principle
E |
Principle I |
Principle
1 |
Principle
A |
Principle
I* |
|
Responsible
caring |
(incl. in Princ. A) |
Principle
II |
(incl.in Princ. 3) |
Principle
B |
Principle
II |
|
Integrity
in relationships |
Principle
C |
Principle
III |
Principle
4 |
Principle
C |
Principle
III |
|
Responsibility
to society |
(incl. in Princ. B) |
Principle
IV |
Principle
3 |
Principle
D |
Principle
IV |
|
Beneficence
and nonmaleficence |
Principle
A |
(incl. in Princ. II) |
(incl. in Princ. 3) |
(incl. in Princ. B) |
(incl. in Princ. II) |
|
Fidelity
& responsibility |
Principle
B |
(incl. in Princ. IV) |
Principle
3 |
(incl. in Princ. D) |
(incl. in Princ. IV) |
|
Justice |
Principle
D |
(incl. in Princ. I) |
(incl. in Princ. 1) |
(incl. in Princ. A) |
Principle
IV |
|
Competence |
(incl.in Princ.. D) |
(incl.in Princ. II) |
Principle
2 |
(incl. in Princ. B) |
(incl. in Princ. II) |
*In the Code of Ethics for Psychologists Working in Aotearoa/New
Table 2. – Comparisons of moral rights underlying the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and
those underlying codes of ethics in psychology.
|
Universal Declaration of Human Rights |
Codes of Ethics in Psychology |
|
Right to be treated primarily as a person |
Recognize as fundamental the principle of respect for the dignity of person |
|
Right to be appreciated primarily as a person |
Recognize that all persons have a right to have their
innate worth as human beings appreciated. |
|
Right to non-discrimination |
Recognize as fundamental the right not to be
discriminated because of culture, nationality, ethnicity, colour, race,
religion, sex, gender, marital status, sexual orientation, physical or mental
abilities, age, socioeconomic status, or any other preference or personal
characteristic, condition, or status. |
|
Right to justice |
Recognize that all persons have a right to fair
treatment and due process |
|
Right to freedom |
Recognize as fundamental the right to self-determination
and autonomy |
|
Right to education, health and well-being |
Recognize as fundamental the principle of caring for others and being concerned for their
welfare |
|
Right to protection, security and social order |
Recognize as fundamental the right to informed consent
and the principle of responsible and
competent caring |
|
Right to privacy |
Recognize as fundamental the right to privacy and confidentiality |
|
Right to free and full consent |
Recognize as fundamental the right to free and full
consent |
|
Recognition of duties to the community |
Recognize as fundamental the principle of professional, scientific, and social responsibility |
|
Respect for fundamental human rights and freedoms |
Recognize as fundamental the principle of respects for human rights |
Table 3. – Comparisons of the ethical principles underlying codes
of ethics in psychology, sports (coaching) and martial arts.
|
Psychology1 |
Sports (coaching)2 |
Martial Arts3 |
|
·
Respect
for the dignity and rights of persons/peoples ·
Integrity ·
Responsibility
to society ·
Competence ·
Caring
for others – concerns for their welfare |
·
Respect
for the dignity of participants ·
Responsible
coaching ·
Integrity ·
Competence ·
Concerns
for others’ welfare ·
Social
responsibility |
·
Humility ·
Courage
to stand up for truth and justice ·
Benevolence ·
Self-control ·
Integrity ·
Respect
and sensitivity toward others ·
Honour ·
Loyalty ·
Devotion
to others |
1 Based on a
comparative analysis of the ethical principles used to develop the American
Psychological Association’s Ethical
Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, the Canadian Psychological
Association’s Code of Ethics for
Psychologists, the European Federation of Psychologists Associations’ Meta-Code of Ethics, the Sociedad Mexicana de Psicología’s Código Ético del Psicólogo, and the New Zealand Psychological
Society’s Code of Ethics for
Psychologists Working in Aotearoa/New Zealand.
2 Based on a
comparative analysis of the ethical principles used to develop the Code of Ethics of the Canadian Professional
Coaches Association, the United
States Olympic Committee Coaching Ethics Code and the Codes of Ethics of the National Coaching Foundation (
3 Based on a
comparative analysis of the ethical principles Code of Ethics of the United States Martial Arts Federation and the
Code of Bushido.
Table 4. – Proposed framework for the development of a universal declaration of ethical principles
for psychologists.
|
Principle 1 Respect
for the dignity and rights of persons/peoples |
Principle 2 Caring
for others and concerns for their welfare |
Principle 3 Competence |
Principle 4 Integrity |
Principle 5 Professional,
scientific, and social responsibility |
|
·
Respect
for dignity and worthiness of persons/peoples ·
Non-Discrimination ·
Informed
consent (protection) ·
Free
consent (freedom) ·
Fair
Treatment/Due
Process (justice) ·
Privacy ·
Confidentiality |
·
Caring
(health and well-being) ·
Maximize
Benefits ·
Minimize
Harm ·
Offset/Correct
Harm |
·
Competence
(responsible caring) ·
Self-knowledge
(responsible caring) |
·
Accuracy/Honesty ·
Objectivity
(understanding and managing of biases) ·
Straightforwardness/Openness ·
Avoidance
of Deception ·
Avoidance
of Conflict of Interest |
·
Development
of Knowledge ·
Respect
for society ·
Duties to
society (development of society) |
THE FEASIBILITY OF THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION
OF ETHICAL PRINCIPLES FOR PSYCHOLOGISTS
Summary of the Focus Group Discussion
International Congress on Licensure,
Certification and Credentialing of Psychologists
Montréal (Québec),
There are
shared values across cultures because of our common humanity, although
practices may vary with different beliefs, religions, social conditions and
political systems. The purpose of the
session was to explore the feasibility of a universal declaration of ethical
principles for psychologists and how it could be best achieved. There were over
40 participants and almost all of the following countries were represented:
In July
2002, Janel Gauthier presented a paper at a symposium on professional codes of
ethics across national boundaries at the International Congress of Applied
Psychology in
During the
Congress in
1.
Is
a declaration of ethical principles for psychologists feasible on a world-wide
basis? Why? Why not? What do you see as the biggest benefits? What do you see
as the biggest disadvantages?
2.
Janel
has identified five principles that appear to be common in codes of ethics
across four continents. Do you think that psychologists in different cultures
would interpret these as having the same meaning or different meanings?
i) Respect for the dignity and rights of persons. What does this mean? What about peoples?
ii) Caring for others and concerns for their welfare. What others? Where? Individuals and groups?
iii) Competence. In what? Is this different from ii) above?
iv) Integrity. What does that mean?
v) Professional, scientific, and social responsibility. What does tha mean?
3. Are there important ethical principles that are not included in the above?
4. What advice do you have for Janel and his working group?
·
Overall,
participants thought that a declaration of ethical principles for psychologists
on a world-wide basis was a worthwhile project.
·
They
thought that it was “feasible” – “doable.”
·
There
can be no such thing as a universal code of conduct because of the diversity in
the world, but a universal declaration of ethical principles would be feasible.
·
Even
if there are different definitions of self, there are moral principles that are
general to us all.
·
There
will be difficulties and obstacles.
·
Language
will be an obstacle because meanings can change in the translation.
·
There
seems to be two separate approaches to ethics :
one individually-based and one collectively based.
·
It
will require broad consultation, including minorities and indigenous peoples
across multiple cultures.
·
To
achieve a high level of consensus, it will be essential to take into account
the huge diversity the world and differences in world view.
·
We
should focus on why it is being done:
·
Framework
of ethical principles for the development of codes of ethics.
·
Reference
that could be used to assess progress in the articulation of ethical guidelines
·
For
those who have developed a codes of ethics, it may be a way to identify
principles that they have not yet considered
·
Develop
continuing process for dialogue on ethical principles.
·
Contribution
to the improvement of the human condition.
·
If
adopted by international psychology organizations, it could become a moral
standard that could be used to support international actions against practices
that are contrary to the high level of morality that must regulate the
scientific and professional roles assumed by psychologists in modern society.
·
Someone
asked “Is it [the universal declaration] to unite us as a profession globally?”
·
It
was suggested that the preamble indicate that these principles could be
interpreted in different ways in different cultures.
·
We
need to allow for different operationalization of these principles in the
context of the cultures in which they are used.
·
The
principles need to be articulated in such a way that they can be
operationalized differently around different cultures or needs, but still
honoured.
·
Some
participants stated that we need a universal mission statement from which the
principles will flow. There was some
discussion about what this mission might be.
·
Psychologists
need to be aware that psychologists are not agents of state control.
·
We
need to avoid the universal principles being used to oppress people.
·
We
need to underline the dangerousness of psychological knowledge when it is
misused.
·
Is
there a way to state the objectives in such a way that we say that
psychologists do not harm, do not oppress, etc. ?
·
Some
participants expressed their dissention with the idea of including a mission
statement.
·
It
was suggested to be sparse and parsimonious to avoid a crash.
·
It
was suggested to move slowly, with tolerance for ambiguity.
·
Go
for modest objectives.
·
Application
of the principles in psychology as a science and as a profession :
“We believe this about oppression, exploitation, the human spirit, human
relationships, etc.” We can arrive at
this. Then you can say to somebody: “This body says that you are wrong.”
·
Both
« individuals » and « peoples » need to be recognized and
respected.
·
Its was suggested to recognize that there may be
conflicts between them.
·
Some
thought that there should be two separate principles (one for respect of
individuals and another for respect of peoples) while others argued to keep
them together.
·
Neither
should come first : Write “persons/peoples”
·
Someone
suggested to have only the word « respect »
to designate the principle.
·
We
have different world views. Many of us look at life as “either or” rather than
“wholeness.” We will interpret the word
« respect » differently.
·
There
should be a parameter set to help with the interpretation of the principle.
·
We
should incorporate into the principle respect for the person’s view of
themselves and the world and their relationships to others.
·
We
need a strong statement regarding racism and sexism.
·
Dignity
and respect for indigenous systems need to be integrated.
·
The
principle needs to allow for the different ways in which human dignity is
expressed. It needs to be inclusive.
·
It
was suggested to incorporate in principle 1 the notion of “cultural safety.”
·
First
statement should be “Do no harm”
·
Need
to have continuing knowledge – Caring is not good enough
·
Competence
has to be relative to culture.
·
What
is considered “competent” in one culture may not be considered “competent” in
another culture.
·
We
should have a willingness to consult with one another and to monitor ourselves..
·
Psychology
is not objective and unbiased.
·
It
is difficult to be objective because we study ourselves.
·
Incorporate
the notion of understanding your bias
instead of focusing on objectivity.
·
Key
is to understand ourselves so as not to do harm or to allow ourselves to become
agents of evil.
·
Need
to include something about knowledge creation and use of knowledge for good.
·
No
one is against what is there.
·
Someone
noted that it had little to do with science.
·
What
is the essence of psychology and is it included in the principles?
·
We
should include something about “free exchange” or “free flow” of scientific
information
·
It
would be important to know about codes of ethics in other countries. For
example, the Chinese have humility in their code. Where does that fit?
·
Even
if we do not get there, engaging in this process is very important. In this
process, we need inputs of different ways of thinking.
·
There
was suggestion that the process include the development of ethical dilemmas
that are presented to psychologists from many cultures for resolutions with the
idea of reformulating the principles.
·
To
reach consensus, we must take into account the huge diversity around the world.
·
Consider
using a web site to keep people informed and to seek feedback and advice from those who live
and work in different cultural settings.
· Establish links between the web site housing the information and the web sites of international and national psychology organizations interested in supporting the development of a universal declaration of ethical principles for psychologists.
[1] The term “ethical principle” is used primarily in the
sense of a recognized moral imperative that is to guide our behavior unless it
conflicts with another, higher ranking moral imperative.
[2] As for the codes of ethics in psychology, only codes of ethics in sports
and martial arts that clearly identified the principles used to articulate
standards of conduct were reviewed and compared with codes of ethics in
psychology.