NSBEP NOTES ~ ETHICAL ISSUES VERSUS ETHICAL DILEMMAS ~
In the NSBEP’s oral exam, we ask candidates to describe an ethical dilemma. It has been our
experience that most candidates are well prepared for this aspect of the oral exam. Of course, we
see some candidates who struggle with their ethical dilemma, and when there is a struggle, it is
most often with regard to perceiving a dilemma when none exists.
Although it may seem like a matter of semantics, the distinction between an ethical issue and an
ethical dilemma is an important one, and has significant implications for practice. As
psychologists, we face an enormous diversity of situations in which we must call upon our
knowledge of the Code of Ethics. Ethical situations can be expected to arise as a matter of
routine in our practice, and the great majority of them are fairly straightforward; we can usually
make correct decisions easily and quickly, because the “right” answer is clear.
An ethical situation presents what I will call an ethical “issue” when it is possible to ascertain the
answer by simply adhering to a clear-cut guideline in the Code of Ethics. As an example, a
psychologist who is asked by her hairstylist if she can take him on as a client can easily and
readily come to the conclusion that the answer must be “no,” in adherence with the standard of
avoiding dual relationships (Principle III: Integrity in Relationships). The ethical decision-
making process for an ethical issue such as this should occur quickly, leading to an easy
resolution, since there is no conflict between principles.
Typically, an ethical dilemma, on the other hand, exists when two or more ethical principles or
standards are conflicting with each other. The situation above would become an ethical dilemma
if, for example, the psychologist lives in a remote area, and is the only psychologist available. In
such a case, another principle becomes relevant, namely Principle II: Responsible Caring. This
principle is now competing with the psychologist’s need to avoid the dual relationship. Because
Principle II “trumps” Principle III, in accordance with the hierarchy of the principles, the
psychologist must find a way to manage the dual relationship, rather than avoid it. Perhaps, for
example, the psychologist will need to take on her hairstylist as a client and find a new
hairstylist, to ensure that the best interests of the hairstylist-client are protected.
To perceive an ethical “dilemma” when the issue is clear-cut and there is no conflict between
principles is neither correct nor efficient in practice. In the case of such a misperception, an
easily-resolved ethical situation can instead become needlessly complicated, and moreover, it
can lead to the possibility of the psychologist acting unethically. In the above example, if the
psychologist perceives the simple ethical issue as a dilemma, she may, for example, perceive that
she has an obligation to provide treatment to her hairstylist when she does not. Perhaps, to
complicate matters, her hairstylist has indicated that he feels comfortable with her, and has heard
her talk about the type of therapy she conducts, and he sees her as the only psychologist he
would ever trust. Even so, no ethical dilemma exists, as the psychologist must still avoid the dual
relationship, despite the hairstylist’s wishes. Even though the psychologist may feel conflicted,
or experience a personal dilemma about a situation, a true ethical dilemma does not exist, as
there is conflict between principles.
Of course, I’ve presented but one of an infinite number of possible ethical issues and dilemmas
