Ethics Code
Some might argue that our ethics code sees psychologists as having a responsibility to the world community, not just to the community of people that finds its way into our offices “They are aware of their professional and scientific responsibilities to society and to the specific communities in which they work”;. There are mutual benefits to be derived from expanding our personal borders, stepping out of the comfort zone of our consulting rooms to go to others rather than waiting for “them” to find “us.”
A commitment gap is defined here as the absence of the pledge we need to make to the future of psychology and psychologists. For those of us who train and supervise, we have an ethical obligation to prepare future psychologists to work with a diverse array of people. This obligation maintains whether our own practices or courses are diverse. Failure to do so perpetuates the status quo—preserving the availability and relevancy gaps. In a similar fashion, there are a number of psychologists who are undertaking training in psychopharmacology even though they may never be able to prescribe. They see it as an investment in the future of psychology, a paving of the way for others to offer competent, coordinated care. Supervision offers a second opportunity to address the training gap.
