An Ethical Dilemma

The process of making an ethical decision is guided by specific models that are used to
examine ethical dilemmas. The process begins with the recognition that there is an ethical
decision to be made. The process entails first outlining the scope of the ethical dilemma and
reasons why it is an ethical dilemma. In this post, I state an ethical dilemma, provide its context
and standards that might be used to guide the ethical decision.
 Ethical dilemma:
Myrna must decide whether or not to take Dr. Paige’s job offer. She is also wondering whether
there is another way to work with Dr. Paige that does not involve her being at his house in the
long hours of the night (Pasque, & Kennedy, n.d.).
 Guidance from the profession:
ACPA’s (2006) “Statement of Ethical Principles and Standards” provides some guidance on how
Myrna should approach the situation. Standard 1.1 states that student affairs professionals will
conduct their professional activities in accordance with sound theoretical principles and adopt a
personal value system congruent with the basic tenets of the profession. Standard 2.1 states,
“student affairs professionals will treat students with respect as persons who possess dignity,
worth, and the ability to be self-directed,” also Standard 2.2 states, “Students affairs
professionals will avoid dual relationships with students where one individual serves in multiple
roles that create conflicting responsibilities, role confusion, and unclear expectations such as
counselor/ employer, that may involve incompatible roles and conflicting responsibilities
(American College Personnel Association, 2006).
 Context: Relevant parties and time, place, and manner:

The relevant parties are Mryna and Dr. Paige. The Department of Higher Education and Student
Affairs (HESA) might also be involved as it offers guidelines on how students should relate with
faculty members as well as how funds raised during HESA ‘homecoming’ events are spent.
Time, place, and manner are also important in this scenario. Dr. Paige intends to use the money
raised to offer employment to Mryna, his student. The terms of work seem suspicious as h wants
the student to spend long working hours at his house. The implication is that the female student
will be at the faculty member’s house at night. How does Mry6na feel about working at night in
Dr. Paige’s house? Is it something that she would be comfortable doing? Also, how would
HESA respond to the manner in which funds raised are spent? Is it right for Dr. Paige to use the
money to employ his students?
 Options:
Myrna can turn down the job offer from Dr. Paige. She may let him know that she is not
comfortable with the terms offered. She could also suggest to Dr. Paige tat working from the
institution’s offices would sound better as opposed to having her work from his home. Myrna
may also contact HESA officials and enquire about working on an employment basis with Dr.
Paige, despite the fact that she is in his class. Mryna should let Dr. Paige know her terms if, at
all, she would be willing to take the job offer.
 Application of principles and consequences:
Dr. Paige has given Mryna time to think about his offer and give her a response to him on
Monday during class. He believes that an individual’s right to choose should be respected
(principle of autonomy) (Schuh et al., 2017). Also, Myrna is responsible and accountable for her
own decisions; hence she is given the space to decide whether or not she wants to take the offer.

Dr. Paige also discloses all information pertaining to the terms of work (principle of veracity).
He shares all relevant information such as where Mryna will be working from, the duration of
work, as well as the possibility of spending night hours working at his home. However, terms of
pay or how much she will be earning are omitted. It is also not clear what the consequences of
missing work will be. Dr. Paige does not state clearly whether Mryna will sign a contract as well
as whether HESA permits students to have such working relationships with their professors.
If Mryna decides to decline the job offer, then that should not affect her student-professor
relationship with Dr. Paige. There should be no strained relationship. The principle of justice
implies treating people equitably regardless of their personal opinion (Schuh et al., 2017). She
should get all relevant information on the same if she decides to get clarification from HESA, as
per the principle of veracity.
 Identify the potential consequences of each option.
Myrna could uphold the principle of autonomy, which gives her the right to make a decision and
decline the offer. She is assured of equal treatment as the principle of justice requires all
individuals to be treated equitably regardless of their decisions. She may also uphold the
principle of veracity and enquire from HESA on working terms between a faculty member and a
student. She will then rely on the principle of autonomy and tell Dr. Paige that she can only
accept the job offer if she works within the institution’s offices during the official working hours.

References

American College Personnel Association (2006, March). Statement of ethical principles and
standards (Links to an external site.). Retrieved from http://www.myacpa.org/ethics
Pasque, P. A., & Kennedy, D. (n.d.). A quick wink: A case study about sexual harassment in
higher education (Links to an external site.). Retrieved from
http://www.myacpa.org/sites/default/files/Ethics%20Case%20Study%20-
%20Maybe%20I%20Should%20-%20A%20Quick%20Wink.pdf
Schuh, J. H., Jones, S. R., & Torres, V. (Eds.) (2017). Student services: A handbook for the
profession (6th ed.). Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com