For your professional ethics edification

The ACPE Professional Ethics Commission (PEC) purpose is to educate our members about ethics issues and processes. Each month, we post a commissioner’s reflection* on ethics concerns, including our ethics process.

“I Don’t Want to Be The Bad Guy”

“Holding oneself accountable to ethical standards is not nearly as difficult as holding accountable one’s colleagues” - William May (paraphrased)

It is something that many of us will have encountered in our professional lives: we become aware, either directly or indirectly, that a colleague is engaging in behavior that raises concerns for us. It could be that they are evidencing some form of impairment. Perhaps they are showing signs of a problem with addiction that is affecting their work and their relationships. Or they are manifesting behaviors that may indicate some form of mental impairment, such as depression or early onset dementia. Or it could be that they are behaving in ways that raise ethical concerns, such as inappropriate relationships with students, violating confidentiality, or running a CPE program that violates Standards.

It would not be unusual for any of us to be hesitant to act, at least initially, when confronted with such behaviors. To begin with, we may not be very clear about what we are witnessing or experiencing. Is my colleague having a tough day or a bad stretch, but otherwise seems OK? The behavior may border on the problematic, but is it really so concerning?

Along with that may be an understandable if potentially self-serving concern. “I don’t want to be the bad guy.” We don’t want to be the one who gets our colleague in trouble because of our action. What will they, or anyone else, think of us for filing a complaint?”

Another self-serving concern is about my own safety, wondering about if there may be any retaliation for speaking up. One colleague said to me, “I have an accreditation review coming up. What’s to keep this or any individual from sabotaging my review because of my actions?” Or would a CEC feel secure in filing a complaint against their CE when they worry that their entire certification process may hang in the balance? Will our whistleblower policy protect me?[1]

Perspectives to Consider:

We need to acknowledge that we may be hesitant to file a complaint for a variety of reasons, and we cannot discount the level of anxiety that one might feel in contemplating whether or not to do so. And yet, as professional educators, we are obliged to take our responsibilities seriously in such situations. There are a number of perspectives that can aid us in this discernment.

Professional - I would argue that we have a professional obligation to do so, an obligation that is rooted in our own Code of Professional Ethics and our commitment to each other’s well-being and the well-being of our students. This does not mean that we immediately jump to filing a formal complaint. Our collegial obligations require us to speak to the individual about our concerns and to invite their response.  We may want to consult privately with other colleagues about our concerns before addressing them directly, and certainly, we ought to do this if the individual does not engage in the feedback. Such consultation affords us an opportunity to unpack our concerns and gain a better perspective on their importance and what might need to happen next, including whether or not to file a formal complaint. This does entail some potential risks around issues of confidentiality, so we need to be thoughtful as to how we share our concerns with others in a manner that respect the individual’s privacy and rights of confidentiality as far as possible.

Ethical – There are a number of ethical perspectives that can be of help here.  One is the Principle of Do No Harm. This reminds us of our obligation to keep the well-being of our students at the forefront of our thinking. If we suspect that our colleague may be putting students at risk then we have to consider what needs to be done. The ethical rule of fidelity requires us to honor the core values of our profession and in particular to advocate for those who may be least able to advocate for themselves.

The ACPE Code of Professional Ethics lays out a comprehensive framework for understanding our roles and relationships with our students, each other, and our institutions.  For the sake of the article, I would draw your attention to the following:

In section 4, collegial relationships, ACPE members: “(a) respect the integrity and welfare of colleagues; maintain professional relationships on a professional basis, refraining from disparagement and avoiding emotional, sexual, or any other kind of exploitation. (b) take collegial and responsible action when concerns about incompetence, impairment, or misconduct arise.”

It is (b) that is most pertinent to the focus of this article. Our code obligates us to attend to our concerns about a colleague’s behavior. While this requirement bumps up against our desire not to be the “bad guy,” it is one we must take seriously.

Spiritual – This speaks to our deepest values, whether they are based on holy texts, theological perspectives, or a shared cultural ethos. We are asked to consider: what guides me to do the right thing; what guides me to do right by others. What informs my thoughts/beliefs about what is ethically right or wrong? What helps me apply those ideas in relationship to my colleagues?

Duty to whom – Duty-based ethics (deontological ethics) teaches that “...some acts are right or wrong because of the sorts of things they are, and people have a duty to act accordingly, regardless of the good or bad consequences that may be produced.”(BBC Website - https://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/introduction/duty). This stands in opposition to what is sometimes called consequentialist thinking, “which begins by considering what things are good and identify 'right' actions as the ones that produce the maximum of those good things.” (BBC Website). So, we might wish to confront (or even report) a colleague but hesitate to do so because it might bring them more suffering than we wish to cause. Or we may be more concerned about what will happen to us (socially, professionally) should we take this action.

So it may be helpful to think about the following as we consider our obligations.

• Do I have my colleague’s back? This is not about keeping them out of trouble but rather treating them collegially and professionally, speaking the hard truth while remaining supportive. As we ponder this, we might also ask ourselves: Would I want my friends to tell me when they believe I’m out of line? This question helps us clarify our values and how we apply them.
• Do we care enough about our colleagues to help before something more serious happens, i.e., What if a student files an ethics complaint? What if a student gets hurt? What if the Accreditation Commission gets called in to review the program or center? These questions force us to think about the consequences for our colleague should they persist in their behavior and our responsibility in relation to that.  
• What about the students in our colleagues’ care? Of course, they are particularly vulnerable and may not understand what options they have in relation to their CE.

Steps to Consider

Engage the colleague directly – This is perhaps the most important first step and one we owe to our colleague both as a matter of professional care and as a matter of ethical engagement. So the first step is to talk with them. This should begin with a statement of care and respect, i.e., “I care about you,” “You are important to me,” “I see your gifts, and I also know you’re human.” We should then state directly and simply what our concern is and why it is a concern. It may be that they are unaware of their behavior or its implications. Then, the conversation can become a consultation, where options can be explored. 

Should they become defensive, it remains important to remain caring, engaged, and non-anxious. However, if they remain closed to your feedback it may be helpful to engage one or two colleagues who share your concerns. This may be looked upon as a kind of intervention where the concerning behavior is spelled out, along with the implications for continuing that behavior. In all of this, it is important to enter the conversations prepared to be clear and non-reactive. If the behavior is concerning enough and the resistance is strong enough, it may be important to spell out what your next steps will be. It would also be important, at each step, to document the conversations for future reference.

Should all this prove to be unproductive, then it will be important to consider two options: filing a formal ethics complaint or sending a notification to the Professional Ethics Commission (PEC) or Professional Wellbeing Committee related to the Wellness Fitness Policy for Educators.

What are the implications for not addressing the problem? At the least, your colleague will be at risk for continued problematic behavior. Much more importantly, not addressing the problem puts students at risk for harm that may damage them both personally and professionally.

When all is said and done, I am advocating for an approach that mirrors our own educational process, which includes consultation, confrontation, and holding the students accountable for their behavior.  We do that for the sake of their learning and to protect the patients and families they minister to. Granted, there is more at stake here, but I believe we owe our colleagues (and their students) no less than that.

[1]ACPE’s whistleblower policy can be found here:  https://cdn.manula.com/user/4287/docs/whistleblower-policy.pdf

*Every situation is unique, and any member should not act based solely on the comments in the article but to base action on an independent review of the ethical standards applicable to his/her situation.