Dr. Vaji's Ethical Dilemmas

This is an ethical dilemma because Dr. Vaji is unsure if the students report should be implemented into Leo’s report. The students report might persuade Dr. Vaji to flaw his reports even if it unknowingly. Principle A: Beneficence and Nonmaleficence frames the nature of this dilemma it states that the psychologist will do good, treat people humanely and providing opinions and resolutions based on substantiate findings (Fisher, 2013, p. 25). The principle of justice also helps frame the ethical situation, in (Fisher, 2013 p. 343) it states that psychologists need to use reasonable judgment and take care to avoid potential biases, competence and limitations to avoid unjust practices. According to the Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists (1999) guideline 465.2, Dr. Vaji is responsible for Leo. 6.Who are the stakeholders and how will they be affected by how Dr. Vaji resolves this dilemma?
The stakeholders in this case is Leo, Dr. Vaji, the mid-size university,
Standard 3.04 Avoiding Harm, applies because Dr. Vaji has to ensure that he taking the correct steps not to harm his students. At the very least psychologists should never do harm. 3.05 Multiple Relationships applies here because Dr. Vaji is in two relationships with Leo. 3.09 is relevant because Dr. Vaji could consult with another professional to help him with his ethical dilemma. Students disclosed information about another student information therefore 7.04 is relevant. 7.05 does not apply. However, 7.06 Assessing Student and Supervisee Performance, in subsection does apply Dr. Vaji has an obligation to evaluate Leo on relevant information. Leo should be multi-cultural which includes the hot topic of “Multicultural Ethical Competence”. Ethical supervision on trainees is important and relevant because Leo is a trainee and his supervisor needs to ensure that he is acting