Report of the ACA Ethics Committee: 2006–2007

This report summarizes the activities of the American Counseling Association Ethics Committee during the period from July 1, 2006, through June 30, 2007. Ethics Committee membership, an overview of the mission of the Ethics Committee and goals for 2006–2007, summary data of the complaints filed and the inquiries received, and education activities of the Committee are presented.     

Report of the ACA Ethics Committee: 2004–2005

This report summarizes the activities of the American Counseling Association (ACA) Ethics Committee during the period of July 1, 2004, through June 30, 2005. Summary data of the complaints filed and the inquiries received are presented.     

Report of the ACA Ethics Committee: 2001–2002

This report summarizes the activities of the American Counseling Association (ACA) Ethics Committee during the period of July 1, 2001, through June 30, 2002. An overview of the mission of the Ethics Committee, Ethics Committee membership, educational activities, review of policies and procedures, and adjudication activities is presented.     

Report of the ACA Ethics Committee: 1998–1999

This report summarizes the activities of the American Counseling Association's (ACA) Ethics Committee for 1998–1999. Summary data of the complaints filed and the inquiries received are presented along with a discussion of the other activities of the ACA Ethics Committee.     

Report of the ACA Ethics Committee: 1996–1997

This report summarizes the activities of the American Counseling Association (ACA) Ethics Committee for 1996–1997. Summary data of the complaints filed and the inquiries received are presented along with a discussion of the other activities of the committee.     

Report of the ACA Ethics Committee: 1997–1998

This report summarizes the activities of the American Counseling Association's (ACA) Ethics Committee for 1997–1998. Summary data of the complaints fled and the inquiries received are presented along with a discussion of the other activities of the committee.     

Report of the ACA Ethics Committee: 1992–1993

The activities of the American Counseling Association (ACA) Ethics Committee are summarized for the year 1992–1993. Complaints received and adjudicated by the committee as well as formal inquiries regarding ethical conduct are summarized.     

Report of the ACA Ethics Committee: 2002–2003

This report summarizes the activities of the American Counseling Association (ACA) Ethics Committee during the period of July 1, 2002, through June 30, 2003. Summary data of the complaints filed and the inquiries received are presented.     

Report of the ACA Ethics Committee: 2000–2001

This report summarizes the activities of the American Counseling Association (ACA) Ethics Committee during the period of July 1, 2000, through June 30, 2001. Summary data of the complaints filed and inquiries received are presented.     

Report of the ACA Ethics Committee: 2003–2004

This report summarizes the activities of the American Counseling Association (ACA) Ethics Committee during the period of July 1, 2003, through June 30, 2004. Summary data of the complaints filed and the inquiries received are presented.     

下腰痛综合征的诊治与人文思想

检索1989年～2005年间讨论医院伦理委员会功能的论文,通过文献研究的方法,对论及医院伦理委员会功能之论文的历年篇数变化情况、发表论文地区、作者所属机构、发表刊物及所探讨的功能等几个方面进行整理、归纳、统计,并对所得结果进行分析。     

关于地区机构伦理委员会的调研与思考

通过对辽宁地区29家机构伦理委员会的机构设置情况、工作内容、伦理审查工作的管理等状况的调研,为了解我国医学伦理委员会的发展现状,存在的问题及发展方向提供局部的现实依据,为进一步完善我国医学伦理委员会建设提出建议。     

The Low Risk Research Ethics Application Process at CQUniversity Australia

The CQUniversity Australia Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) is a human ethics research committee registered under the auspices of the National Health and Medical Research Council. In 2009 an external review of CQUniversity Australia’s HREC policies and procedures recommended that a low risk research process be available to the institution’s researchers. Subsequently, in 2010 the Human Research Ethics Committee Low Risk Application Procedure came into operation. This paper examines the applications made under the Human Research Ethics Committee Low Risk Application Procedure during the course of 2010 and 2011. The paper contributes to the literature analyzing the decision-making processes of research review committees through an analysis of the quantitative data relating to the low risk research applications made and through discourse analysis of the qualitative data represented by the assessment comments of the members of the Committee.     

Report of the ACA Ethics Committee: 1993–1994

The activities of the American Counseling Association (ACA) Ethics Committee are reviewed for the year 1993–1994. Summary data of ethical complaints and formal inquiries received during the year are presented followed by a brief discussion of trends noted. Updated information about the revision of the ACA Ethical Standards and the Policies and Procedures for Processing Complaints of Ethical Violations is also provided.     

The ethics of interrogation and the American Psychological Association: A critique of policy and process

The Psychological Ethics and National Security (PENS) task force was assembled by the American Psychological Association (APA) to guide policy on the role of psychologists in interrogations at foreign detention centers for the purpose of U.S. national security. The task force met briefly in 2005, and its report was quickly accepted by the APA Board of Directors and deemed consistent with the APA Ethics Code by the APA Ethics Committee. This rapid acceptance was unusual for a number of reasons but primarily because of the APA's long-standing tradition of taking great care in developing ethical policies that protected anyone who might be impacted by the work of psychologists. Many psychological and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), as well as reputable journalists, believed the risk of harm associated with psychologist participation in interrogations at these detention centers was not adequately addressed by the report. The present critique analyzes the assumptions of the PENS report and its interpretations of the APA Ethics Code. We demonstrate that it presents only one (and not particularly representative) side of a complex set of ethical issues. We conclude with a discussion of more appropriate psychological contributions to national security and world peace that better respect and preserve human rights.     

An overview of the major changes in the 2002 APA Ethics Code

This article summarizes the major changes that were made to the 2002 Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct of the American Psychological Association. The 2002 Ethics Code retains the general format of the 1992 Ethics Code and does not radically alter the obligations of psychologists. One goal of the Ethics Committee Task Force was to reduce the potential of the Ethics Code to be used to unnecessarily punish psychologists. In addition, the revised Ethics Code expresses greater sensitivity to the needs of cultural and linguistic minorities and students. Shortcomings of the 2002 Ethics Code are discussed.     

Chinese researchers promote biomedical regulations: what are the motives of the biopolitical dawn in China and where are they heading?

In the past five years, China has experienced increased efforts to regulate activities in biomedical research and practice. Background is provided on some of the key developments in Chinese bioethics especially in relation to genetics, stem cells, cloning, and reproductive medicine. This background sets the stage for a document entitled "Ethical Guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research," proposed by the Bioethics Committee of the Southern China National Human Gene Research Center, Shanghai, which is reprinted in this volume of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal.     

A visionary and transformational APA Ethics Code: comment on O’Donohue (2019)

ABSTRACT

We contend that many of the criticisms of the American Psychological Association’s current Ethics Code are based on faulty assumptions and insufficient information. While the APA Ethics Committee values commentary on perceived shortcomings of the current Ethics Code as an important aspect of the current revision process, O’Donohue’s article contains inaccuracies that should be addressed. We clarify the functioning of the Ethics Code and the APA adjudication system, including explaining changes made to adjudication in light of the Commission on Ethics Processes. We also explain the transparent, open process the APA has already undertaken to create a revised Ethics Code that is visionary and transformational.     

The Ethics Code Does Not Equal Ethics: A Response to O’Donohue

ABSTRACT

O’Donohue has identified 37 criticisms of the American Psychological Association’s Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (Ethics Code), although many of his criticisms go far beyond what is found written in the APA Ethics Code, to include the process of adjudicating ethics complaints by the American Psychological Association Ethics Committee, and the process by which the Ethics Code was developed. The authors claim that a major shortcoming of O’Donohue’s article is that he adopted an unrealistically expansive role for the Ethics Code that was not clearly linked to furthering the goals of the ethics code revision.     

Report of the ACA Ethics Committee: 1995–1996

This report contains data about ethical complaints and inquiries processed by the American Counseling Association (ACA) Ethics Committee from 1995 to 1996. This report also includes a discussion of the findings of the committee, information about the approval of the new ACA Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice, and educational efforts undertaken by the committee.