The various ethics codes of organizations display a remarkable amount of diversity in definition and expectations. Many similarities and differences can be noted within different areas concerning ethics. This paper compares and analyzes these ethics codes, focusing on the ethics codes of the American Association of Christian Counselors (AACC), and the American Counseling Association (ACA). The differences exist primarily due to the different world view and primary goals of the writers of the individual codes.

Ethics Code Analysis-American Counseling Association vs. American Association of Christian CounselorsEthical codes are rules of professional responsibility, in which make known with difficult issues of what behavior is "ethical" (Corey, Corey & Callanan, 2007). These codes are usually adopted by a person, religion, group, or profession to regulate that entity. Ethical codes help to define accepted or acceptable behaviors; to promote high standards of practice; to provide a point of reference for members to use for self evaluation; to establish a framework for professional behavior and responsibilities; as a vehicle for occupational identity; and as a mark of occupational maturity (Corey et al. 2007).

The ethics codes of the two following counseling associations share certain ethical responsibilities in common, while containing certain responsibilities unique to their organization. The two associations’ ethics codes that will be studied here are the American Counseling Association (ACA) 2005 Draft Code of Ethics and the American Association of Christian Counselors (AACC) Code of Ethics-Y2004 Final Code. The first level of comparison between the two ethics codes begins with finding the similarities and differences they display in their duties to clients.There exist several similarities in this regard between them. In terms of obtaining informed consent, the ACA codes of ethics states, in section A.

2. a. , that clients can choose to either continue or terminate treatment at any time (p. 4).

This would be after the counselor discharges his/her duty in informing the client exactly how the counseling would occur, what the counselor’s credentials were, and what rights and responsibilities were enjoined upon both the counselor and client.In a similar fashion, the AACC code of ethics states, in section 1-310, that Christian counselors must seek a client’s informed consent for all types of services including, the practice of consulting other counselors for help with the client, the possibility of audio/video taping a client’s sessions, the engagement in special counseling methods, and finally the disclosure of client data to other agencies or counselors (p. 10). There are also similarities to be found in how the level of professional competence is viewed.

Level of competence here entails the level of training, education, and experience that the counselor has already acquired. The ACA code of ethics states, in section C. 2. a.

, that counselors must work within the boundaries of their level of education, training, work experience, and state and national credentials (p. 9). The AACC code of ethics states, in section 1-210, that counselors should truthfully state about their level of education, experience, credentials and method of counseling to clients (p. 9). It goes on to state that AACC members should never work beyond their limits.In terms of the dangers that could develop within a counselor-client relationship, both ethics codes differ in how they view sexual/romantic relationships between counselors and former clients.

Both, however, do explicitly forbid sexual/romantic relations between counselors and the clients they currently serve. In section A. 5. b. of the ACA code of ethics allows such relationships to develop after a period of five years elapses since the last treatment occurred, and after counselors demonstrate in writing that the relationship would not harm or exploit the former client in any way (p.

5).The AACC, however, does not allow their counselors to engage in any sexual relations with their former clients. The AACC states (section 1-131, p. 8) that all forms of premarital/extramarital sexual relations with former clients are forbidden. It does however allow counselors to marry their former clients after a period of two years (section 1-133, p.

8). This could happen after a counselor demonstrates that the counseling relationship completely ended, there is no indication of exploitation or harm occurring to the client in the marital relationship, and that the client’s care is being taken care of by a different counselor.This difference in how the two associations view sexual/romantic relations between counselors and former clients stems from the religious viewpoint that some of them carry. Since the AACC espouses religious morals and values in their code of ethics, it is understandable why they don’t allow sexual relations of a premarital/extramarital nature to take place. Another difference in how these associations handle dangers in client-counselor relations is in the way they deal with the dangers clients may pose to themselves or others.The AACC for example states (sections 1-120 to 1-127, p.

6-7) that its counselors would never support a client’s decision to engage in threatening behavior, substance abuse, abortion, divorce, premarital/extramarital sexual affairs, homosexual behavior, and assisted suicide. This is in direct contrast to what the ACA states, which is that they would never impose their values and beliefs onto clients. The difference again stems from the fact that the AACC’s espousal of fundamental Christian morals and values cause it to strictly adhere to these ideals in its ethics code.The ACA is predominantly composed of lay professionals. The second level of comparison is to find the similarities and differences that each association displays in its ethical duties towards the profession.

In regard to relations between colleagues, both associations display similar ethical ideals. Each for example prohibits the solicitation of clients from other counselors. They both also respect whatever different approaches professionals from other associations or agencies use towards caring for clients.The forming of dual relationships, which involves combining personal or business affairs with the professional relationship, between employees is viewed differently between the two associations. The AACC does not explicitly mention about the case of dual relationships between employees.

It only states (section 1-621) that guidelines should be developed in delineating the professional relationship between supervisors and their staff (p. 16). The ACA, however, states (F. 3.

e. that supervisors can only engage in dual relationships with supervisees that are seen as being potentially beneficial to the overall relationship they share (p. 14). The way each association deals with personal problems of its employees does not differ significantly. Both associations, for example, prohibit sexual harassment in the workplace.

They also forbid any form of job discrimination to take place. No counseling relationship is allowed to exist between supervisors and their employees because of the potential problems inherent in that.The ACA in particular does not allow friends or family members to serve in a supervisor-subordinate relationship with each other. Finally, in terms of relationship to society, the two ethics codes differ here.

The ACA states (H. 1. b. ) that should any of their ethics codes conflict with the laws of any governmental entity, then counselors should try to resolve the conflict while continuing to adhere to the ACA code of ethics.

In case no resolution could be found in the conflict then counselors can choose to adhere to the laws of the governmental entity (p. 19).The AACC states (section 1-820) that it would generally abide by the laws of any governmental entity, unless it conflicted with their ethical ideals, in which case they would work to change the laws (p. 18). Also, the AACC states that they would advocate for social laws and policies that facilitated the growth of Christian counseling throughout society. A hypothesis for why the AACC and ACA differ here is that since the AACC gives precedence to Christian ideals over social policy, it would work to change any laws or regulations that differed with these ideals rather than simply abiding by them.

The ACA, on the other hand, seems to give precedence to societal laws and policies over its own whenever an irreconcilable conflict occurs between its own ethical ideals and those of the greater society. In conclusion although there are differences related to the value system and mission of the AACC and the ACA, the ethical codes of these three American professional counseling organizations share in common several important core elements. Religious values are the main cause for dissent among these two professional bodies and can also account for differences in tone and focus of the codes of ethics.