Assignment: Marks 25
· The answer to the questions depends on your view as a psychologist who knows about the code of ethics (APA).
· In case of any citation make proper reference.
· Plagiarism if found, assignment will not be liable to get accepted and marked.
You are an experienced therapist and coming up to ending your sessions with a client that you have been seeing for the past nine months. You are about to have your first baby and are taking a little time off from work. Your client is a 47 year old woman whom you have been helping for depression. She is a woman who loves to bring you little gifts at the end of each session. So far she has brought you small plants, little desk ornaments and some sweets. You have spoken to her about this habit and reminded her that she does not need to bring you gifts. She is aware of your concerns, but she says she finds the sessions so helpful and you are so kind she just likes to show you how much she appreciates the help that you are giving her. You have spoken to your supervisor about this and she has encouraged you to keep reminding the woman that she should try not to bring you gifts to therapy and the reasons why. At the end of this session your client wishes you well with the new baby and gives you an envelope with a congratulations card in it. You thank her and she leaves the office. Later when you get home you open the card and discover that she has left a large amount of money inside the envelope with a note about her wish for you to get something nice for yourself and the baby.
1. What do you do?
2. Will it make a difference if you know the woman is wealthy or not wealthy?
3. What are the possible consequences to you giving it back or keeping it?
4. What if it was a small amount of money? Would that make a difference?
Case 2. Mariam is a newly qualified psychologist who has been asked to carry out a neuropsychological assessment on Mrs Alrashid who is 61 years old. Mrs Alrashid arrives to the clinic on her own and explains that her daughter will be joining her, but is stuck in traffic. You agree to start without her and begin to explain what to expect and what the purpose of the assessment is. She is co-operative and friendly and the assessment proceeds. Forty-five minutes into the testing there is a knock at the door to say that Mrs Alrashid’s daughter is here and would like to sit in with her mother and speak to the psychologist. After checking that this is Ok with the client Mariam lets the daughter join them on condition she is quiet and doesn’t try to help her mother. When the appointment is finished Mrs Alrashid’s daughter asks to speak with the psychologist. She is curious why her mother is being assessed and where the request came from. With Mrs Alrashid’s permission, Mariam explains that their family doctor recommended an assessment because there was some concern about Mrs Alrashid’s cognitive ability and capacity to look after her own affairs.
Mrs Alrashid’s daughter explains that this request has in fact come from her younger brother who is close friends with the referring doctor. She is concerned about his motive for the assessment. He needed some money to buy a new flat and had asked his mother. She had refused on the grounds that it was not in a good area and so not a good investment, but she was willing to give him some money if he found a better property. She had already given him a substantial sum of money ten years ago to buy a villa for his family. Her daughter believed that her brother was trying to prove that his mother was mentally incompetent so he could take over her financial affairs.
1. Do you carry on with the assessment? If yes, why? If no, why?
2. Will your decision be effected by whether her performance so far showed evidence of impairment or no impairment?
3. What if the assessment performance already showed signs of impairment?
4. What is your professional opinion of the referring doctor?
5. Would you give any advice to the daughter and mother about the consequences of poor results suggesting impairment or not
Case 3. Mr Turki, aged 56 was admitted to the psychiatric ward twelve days ago in an acute confused state. He was transferred from the emergency department of a local hospital after being treated for severe dehydration and stitches for a cut on his head. The psychiatrist has asked you to carry out an assessment of cognitive functioning as she suspects there is some organic impairment. On interviewing the patient you discover that he is much recovered and is lucid and can carry on a good level of conversation. Later that day you analyse the results of the assessment and notice that there is a big difference between his verbal memory ability and visual memory ability. There is also evidence of problems with executive functioning, especially poor impulse control. Overall, the findings suggest a pattern of impairment consistent with a dementia process. You report your findings back to the psychiatrist who tells you that the results from a brain scan also shows evidence of atrophy and diagnoses small vessels disease. You agree to see Mr Turki again to discuss the results and future plans for treatment. When you next see him he is on the ward with his wife and two older sons. You discuss the results of the scan and assessment and what treatment options exist. Mr Turki’s wife gets upset and her son’s decide to take her home after you agree to meet again to talk about the diagnosis. You are about to leave when Mr Turki asks you to stay as there is something important he wants to talk about.
Once his family have left Mr Turki tells you that he had spent the last year locating his first wife and son whom he married in a different country. He had recently travelled to see them and was arranging for them to travel and live nearby. Mr Turki then became very emotional and upset, he cried about not having taken care of his son and wanting to make up for the many years he had not been a responsible father to him. His current wife and family are aware that he was married before and that he had been trying to find them. However, they were very hostile about the idea of Mr Turki contacting them, had told him to leave it alone, and that too much time had passed. He had not told them that he had found them and met with them. Mr Turki is a successful businessman and wants to make sure that his first son is able to inherit a fair share of his wealth. He asks you not to speak with anyone about this. After further conversation and Mr Turki has calmed down you make an appointment to see him again and leave.
Before your next appointment Mr Turki is discharged from the ward and returns home. Unfortunately, a few days later he suffers a massive heart attack and dies. You are not immediately informed and only find out after he does not turn up for the appointment. You speak to the Psychiatrist about the conversation you had with him, but she tells you to leave it as it will cause too much distress because the family are still grieving.
2. What should you do? Who do you speak to? How will you deal with this situation?
3. Would further evidence effect your decision?
4. What if you had discovered during an interview with his wife and children that his personality had changed a lot in the past 18 months and he was becoming more impulsive and making reckless decisions?
5. What if you had discovered during an interview with his wife and children that his personality had changed a lot in the past 18 months and he was becoming more impulsive and making reckless decisions?
6. What if you discover that the psychiatrist is a friend of the family?