The welfare or well-being of a person with severe multiple disabilities?

Grzegorz Wiącek

Grzegorz Wiącek Institute of Psychology, The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin

Keywords: professional ethics; recipient of psychological activities; rehabilitation psychology; people with disability

Abstract

The paper addresses the problem of the welfare of the person who is the recipient of a psychologist’s professional activities as the paramount principle in the ethical evaluation of such activities. Emphasis is placed on two important issues connected with this problem: the accuracy of the concept of recipient of the activities undertaken by a psychologist and the comparison of the value of welfare and well-being categories in the ethical analysis of psychological activities. Emphasis in the paper is placed on the value of the concept of recipient of a psychologist’s activities, which becomes particularly evident with reference to the situation of work for the benefit of individuals with various kinds of disabilities and for the benefit of their families. The article also elaborates the thesis of the greater value of the category of welfare in ethical analysis of the psychologist’s professional activities.

References

Brzeziński, Z. & Zakrzewska, M. (2008). Etyczne problemy działalności praktycznej, edukacyjnej i naukowej psychologa. In J. Strelau & D. Doliński (Eds.), Psychologia. Podręcznik akademicki (vol. 1, pp. 137-174). Gdańsk: Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.
Dennis, C. (2004). Deaf by design. Nature, 431, 894-896.
European Federation of Psychologists’ Associations (2005). Meta-Code of Ethics. Brussels, Belgium: EFPA.
Friedman, S. L., Helm, D. T., & Marrone, J. (1999). Caring, control, and clinicians’ influence: Ethical dilemmas in developmental disabilities. Ethics & Behavior, 9(4), 349-364.
International Union of Psychological Science (2008). Universal declaration of ethical principles for psychologists. Retrieved Nov 30, 2013, from http://iupsys.net/index.php/ethics/declaration.
Kuschel, C. A. & Kent, A. (2011). Improved neonatal survival and outcomes at borderline viability brings increasing ethical dilemmas. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 47, 585-589.
Polish Psychological Association (PTP) (1992). Code of professional ethics for the psychologist. Warsaw: PTP.
Weinberg, A. (2005). Pediatric cochlear implants: The great debate. Penn Bioethics Journal, 1(1), 1-4.
Wilson, N., Clegg, J., & Hardy, G. (2008). What informs and shapes ethical practice in Intellectual Disability services? Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 52(7), 608-617.