ETHICS & BEHAVIOR, 15(4), 293308

Copyright 2005, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

A New Ethical Praxis: Psychologists

Emerging Responsibilities in Issues
of Social Justice
Dhruvi Kakkad
Department of Counseling Psychology
Fordham University

Given the increase in human rights abuses and suffering in the world, psychologists
bear an ethical responsibility to become more vocal and active on issues of social justice. Western psychology has failed to realize its full transformative potential, largely
due to its preoccupation with the individual level of intervention, historical tendency
to respond reactively to war and violence, and various cultural biases and
ethnocentrism that exist within the field. Instead, psychology must take a more
proactive, systems-oriented approach to addressing human rights issues. Due to the
lack of guidelines in engaging in professional activism, psychologists must first more
critically identify, challenge, and clarify relevant ethical concerns, including issues
of culture, competence, and nonmaleficence involved in this type of work. This article explores these complex ethical considerations and suggests ways that psychologists can evolve their roles as researchers, therapists, consultants and educators. The
aim is to stimulate dialogue about how psychology can embed ethical activism into
its professional identity.
Keywords: cultural bias, ethical responsibility, enthnocentrism, social justice

Torture occurs in more than 130 countries and has increased by 23% in the past decade, which means that nearly 7 out of every 10 countries are in violation of the
United Nations Convention Against Torture (Amnesty International, 2004;
Gorman, 2001). The U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service annually authorizes approximately 200,000 asylum cases for humanitarian reasons, and it is estimated that between 200,000 and 400,000 survivors of torture currently reside in
Correspondence should be addressed to Dhruvi Kakkad, 322 W 57th Street, Apt. 16S, New York,
NY 10019. E-mail: dhruvi.kakkad@gmail.com

294

KAKKAD

the United States (Gorman, 2001). This sociopolitical reality provides only a
glimpse of human rights atrocities committed daily that have serious psychosocial
consequences for individuals and communities. Psychologists must subsequently
recognize and own their professional responsibility in contributing to the local, national, and international debate on social justice issues and actively participate in
efforts to challenge the structural underpinnings of inequality. The professions active involvement in confronting social injustice is a controversial and complex issue, but leaders in the psychological community have long advocated for the need
to respond to the larger social issues of our times (James, 1995/1910; Miller, 1969;
Seligman, 1998). Perhaps our fear of the complex ethical dimensions that come
with such involvement keeps us neutral and fearful of action, but as Winter, Christie, Wagner, and Boston (2001) suggested, feigning neutrality is intellectually
dishonest and socially irresponsible (p. 366). Psychologists must seize opportunities to engage in global dialogue through theory, research, and practice. This article
will explore the ethical dimensions of psychologists roles in global issues of social
justice. First, three ideological underpinnings of psychology will be identified that
contribute to the professions current lack of social activism and will be reframed
to reenvision roles psychology can play in societal transformation. With this foundation, more specific ethical concerns that arise in psychologists work on social
issues across different professional activities, including research, therapy, consultation, and education, will be examined. Ethical considerations of culture, competence, and nonmaleficence are embedded within the discussion of each professional role, and specific examples of potential dilemmas and suggested guidelines
are provided.

IDEOLOGICAL CRITIQUE OF PSYCHOLOGY

Level of Analysis
Before examining specific ethical dilemmas psychologists may encounter in human rights work, it is important to first critique ideological underpinnings of psychology that constrict and complicate the full transformative potential of our profession. Fundamental concerns include psychologys preoccupation with the
individual level of analysis, the need to shift from reactive to proactive approaches
to social injustice, and the impact of cultural biases and ethnocentrism in psychologists work. First, psychologists have largely ignored structural features of societies that propagate maladjustment, focusing more on individual responses to them
(Winter et al., 2001). For instance, traditional modes of psychotherapy limit the
progress individuals can make because they help individuals learn better to adapt
to their environmentan environment that may be pathological and remain oppressive. Although the individual level of intervention is important, ignoring pa-

RESPONSIBILITIES IN ISSUES OF SOCIAL JUSTICE

295

thology at a systemic level complacently perpetuates injustice and circumscribes

our professional roles. Consequently, psychologists must step back from the myopic view of the well-being of the individual and take on a systems-oriented approach toward prevention, intervention, and lasting social change.
Reaction Versus Proaction
A related concern of psychologys call toward social responsibility is the issue of
proaction versus reaction. More specifically, the profession has historically tended
to reactively respond to violence, ethnopolitical conflict, trauma, and other imminent crises, without longer-term vision of how to proactively prevent or minimize
these events. For example, interest in the effects of violence and war peaked during
World War II and again during the Cold War, and only saw a more prominent resurgence after the nuclear testing conflict between India and Pakistan in 1998. Researchers argue that to develop long-term visions of achieving a more just society,
psychologists must expand their professional activities and increasingly take their
work to the public arena (Wessells, Schwebel, & Anderson, 2001). Though the potential positive impact of psychologists working in the public arena is tangible,
various concerns inhibit our involvement. Some psychologists may feel overwhelmed by the scope and depth of such issues beyond the individual level. Others
fear that public work may lead to the politicization of the field and subsequently
damage its credibility (Wessells et al., 2001). Additional concerns include the potential for role confusion and the fear of overstating or misrepresenting knowledge
based on current psychological research (Suedfeld & Tetlock, 1992). These trepidations speak to valid ethical concerns, and the ensuing discussion will address
how psychologists can participate in the public arena without extending beyond
their boundaries of competence.
Cultural Values
Third, the culture-bound values that permeate Western-based psychology pose
ethical challenges in human rights work. Although psychology may strive to be an
impartial, value-neutral science based on the principles of empiricism, it is imbued
with values encompassing individual freedom, responsibility, and self-actualization (Dawes, 2001). But if the lens with which we address social problems is limited by our Western worldview, we risk being culturally biased in our definitions of
adjustment and well-being, which can lead to cultural imperialism. Such encapsulation undermines and dismisses cultural tradition and history that could in fact be
instrumental in promoting the welfare of the affected community (Pederson,
1995). On the other hand, holding a position of cultural relativism, which avoids
imposing value judgments and allows each cultural context to be understood
within its own frame of reference, is equally problematic, as it provides a naive ex-

296

KAKKAD

planation for some important human rights abuses, such as dowry deaths and female infanticide. Subsequently, in this debate over cultural values, it is critical to
weigh the desire to prevent cultural imperialism against the need for moral accountability and avoiding extreme cultural relativism. The position of universalism achieves this balance by simultaneously allowing for the understanding of
psychological processes common across cultures and the recognition that their
manifestations may differ significantly (Pederson, 1995). The complexity of appreciating both similarities and differences poses multiple challenges in the ethical
decision-making process. Despite the complexity, we cannot avoid defining and
clarifying values simply because it is a difficult task. Working toward social justice
requires that we sincerely embrace and promote certain values, while continuously investigating the appropriateness of their universal application (Winter et
al., 2001, p. 367). Thus, the question is not whether or not values should influence
psychological research and practice, but rather, ethically, how do psychologists
moderate which values are promoted through research and practice? The following
discussion more specifically addresses cultural values relevant to the competent
and ethical psychological work in the global arena.
The Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (herein referred
to as the Ethics Code; APA, 2002) provides a framework for the provision of culturally sensitive services and urges psychologists to cultivate awareness of cultural
considerations and eliminate the effect of their biases in their work (p. 1063).
However, this statement is noted as an aspirational goal rather than an enforceable
standard of conduct. New Standard 2. 01b specifies that, when scientific or professional knowledge establishes that an understanding of factors associated with
age, gender, gender identity, race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, language, or socioeconomic status(pp. 10631064) is
essential to the delivery of competent services, psychologists must possess relevant training or experience, and should obtain additional consultation or supervision to ensure the competent provision of services to the population of interest.
Standard 2.01e adds that, in emerging areas of psychological research and practice, psychologists must take reasonable steps (p. 1064) to ensure competency
and protect clients and others from potential harm. Though the Ethics Code cannot
explicitly address the ethical responsibilities of every specialty or every act taken
by psychologists in their professional roles, it does attempt to address core duties
and standards to be applied across multiple contexts. Nevertheless, professionals
must be aware of inadequacies of current professional standards, consider alternative guiding principles, and help shape more culture-centered ethical standards for
the future (Knapp & VandeCreek, 2003; Pederson, 1995; Sue, Arredondo, &
McDavis, 1995). The Guidelines for Providers of Psychological Services to Ethnic, Linguistic, and Culturally Diverse Populations (APA, 1993) provides greater
specificity and direction, but is purely aspirational in nature and does not hold psychologists accountable for not abiding by the delineated guidelines. With the dra-

RESPONSIBILITIES IN ISSUES OF SOCIAL JUSTICE

297

matic increase in refugee populations in the United States, and with the escalation
of war and conflict worldwide, it is imperative that the field of psychology more
specifically address the complex ethical responsibilities required to work competently and effectively with international populations.
At minimum, social justice work requires a sociocultural framework for ethical
decision making that stresses the importance of understanding the socioeconomic
and psychological roles of culture, culturally specific models and definitions of
well-being, the role of cultural values and potential biases in research and treatment, and competency in working within different cultures (Sue et al., 1995). Becoming a culturally skilled psychologist is an ongoing, active process in which
psychologists must continually examine their own beliefs, attitudes, knowledge,
and skills, as well as those of the groups with which they work. The Ethics Code
dictates that they must actively seek out education, consultation, and training experiences to enhance their competence (APA, 2002). Despite good intentions, psychologists may inadvertently violate ethical standards due to misunderstandings,
lack of knowledge or specialized skills, prejudiced attitudes that distort thinking,
lack of attention to the consequences of counseling in the clients cultural framework, or apathy or disengagement from responsibility (Pederson, 1995). Thus, ethical practice in the global arena consists of meticulous consideration of cultural
variables and how psychologists levels of cultural awareness impact their level of
professional competence.

ETHICS IN PROFESSIONAL ROLES

Having established a general framework of ethical considerations, it is important
to examine more specific ethical concerns that arise across different professional
roles. This discussion will attempt to address core issues in research, practice, consultation, and activism, and education as it relates to psychologists work on issues
of social justice. It is acknowledged that all potentially pertinent areas of ethical inquiry may not be fully addressed, but the discussion will intersperse various examples to more clearly articulate relevant ethical dilemmas.
Research
Researchers bear ethical responsibility for their empirical theories, tools, and findings, as well as how each is used. Peace psychology researchers advocate for the
promotion of inclusiveness, diversity, and fairness in their research and practice,
but urge against the domination of Western approaches in research to prevent the
development of culturally biased concepts and tools (Kimmel, 1995; Wessells et
al., 2001). Such misapplication of knowledge would only contribute to the further
marginalization of oppressed or local voices and would result in inequitable distri-

298

KAKKAD

bution of resources, including publication space, as well as research and program

funding. Although the power asymmetry and privilege of Western countries may
be an undeniable reality, psychologists can systematically work to incorporate perspectives from other cultures, thereby enhancing cultural relevance of psychological theory and method, and building equity within the house of psychological science (Wessells et al., 2001, p. 353). Researchers must also provide thorough
informed consent to research participation as well as opportunities for debriefing
when working with oppressed and traumatized populations, particularly when cultural and linguistic barriers are present.
Researchers within our profession can also play an important role in helping
inform prevention, intervention, and policy to promote psychological well-being
and speak out against psychologically damaging policies (DeLeon, OKeefe,
VandenBos, & Kraut, 1996; Suedfeld & Tetlock, 1992; Wessells et al., 2001).
Several examples of effective use of psychological knowledge in the public
arena demonstrate the power of research in addressing social ills. In South Africa, psychologists used social identity theory to elucidate the detrimental effects
of making ethnic group identities highly salient (e.g., potentially increasing the
likelihood of intergroup conflict) and were able to use this research to argue for
national unity to develop a nonracial state (Dawes, 2001; Hogg & Abrams,
1988). Whites (1977) research on ArabIsraeli conflict raised awareness of important psychological dimensions of the conflict, particularly the need to address
the perpetuation of damaging misperceptions. Although he did not advocate for
particular policy interventions, he did give focus to the often neglected psychological dimensions of peace. Yet another example is that of Angolan orphans
who had been separated from their parents and placed en masse in institutions or
orphanages that were overcrowded, impoverished, and understaffed. Psychologists presented to the Angolan government Bowlbys (1979) research on the detrimental effects of rearing children in such conditions, which led to a decrease in
the institutionalization of children and an increase in efforts to document, trace,
and reunify these children with their extended families (Wessells et al., 2001).
Research on compassion fatigue and vicarious traumatization in working with
survivors of torture and refugee trauma underscores the need for psychologists
to attend to their own psychological reactions and their subsequent personal
well-being as well as professional competence (Gorman, 2001; Pope & Garcia-Peltoniemi, 1991). These examples illustrate how psychologists can use psychological knowledge gained through research to inform policy and other types
of intervention.
Additionally, psychologists must construct theory based on the lived experiences of oppressed individuals to develop empirically validated strategies to inform the survival, healing, and reconstruction within injured communities
(Comas-Das, Lykes, & Alarcn, 1998). Thus, rather than just developing research
out of theoretical imperatives, psychologists should broaden their involvement

RESPONSIBILITIES IN ISSUES OF SOCIAL JUSTICE

299

to include collaborative relationships within oppressed communities and be open

to developing new conceptualizations of how individuals, families, and communities are being impacted on multiple levels by social injustice. Western psychologists must bracket their preconceived research and conceptual paradigms and allow for new formulations of human behavior that more accurately encapsulate the
complex experiences and realities of various individuals and communities impacted by systematic violence and oppression.
Therapy
Ethical issues of competence and cultural sensitivity are also critical to the delivery
of therapeutic services offered to groups affected by violence and social injustice.
Psychologists must be aware of culture-specific models of distress to put the clients clinical presentation in context. For example, survivors of torture experience
a range of psychological reactions to trauma, including feelings of guilt and helplessness, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, and dissociation (Pope & Garcia-Peltoniemi, 1991). Many survivors also come from cultures that somaticize
distress, so clinicians must not assume physical complaints are purely attributable
to physical injuries sustained during torture. Additionally, a survivors presentation may look pathological to a Western-trained counselor, but may be congruent
with the expression of distress in the clients culture of origin. For instance, individuals from parts of Africa may speak of hearing voices or having out-of-body experiences, and rather than being indications of delusional processes, they may simply be culturally congruent expressions of spiritual beliefs. Although
overpathologizing is a legitimate concern when working with culturally diverse
clients, psychologists must also refrain from underdiagnosing pathology, as individuals may indeed exhibit premorbid psychopathology not related to their
trauma. Cognizance of such nuances is imperative for competent practice with
such populations.
Continuing with the example of survivors of torture and refugee trauma, a paramount initial goal in clinical work is to establish safety and build a trusting therapeutic alliance (Pope & Garcia-Peltoniemi, 1991). Building trust may include cultural sensitivity to linguistic differences, the use of interpreters, and a careful
review of informed consent and confidentiality issues. Clinicians must not engage
in exploratory work prematurely without establishing such trust, particularly because the dyadic therapeutic relationship may evoke aspects of the torture experience. Therapy may recreate experiences of interrogations and torture, as both involve two individuals, one individual being a representative of the state or larger
society, and the other feeling vulnerable, meeting in a private space (Gorman,
2001; Pope & Garcia-Peltoniemi, 1991). Other parallels between the two experiences include questioning or interrogation of extremely personal matters, discrepancy in power, and the intensity of emotion evoked during the process. The

300

KAKKAD

therapist must therefore continuously monitor safety and therapeutic boundaries

so as not to recreate the torturervictim relationships. The survivors trust in external authority was inhumanely violated, and a therapist unaware of the aforementioned issues risks retraumatizing the client. Treatment should subsequently demonstrate keen awareness of nonverbal signals, communication styles, language
barriers, significance of self-disclosures, power and role differentials, gender and
age factors, and help-seeking models within the clients culture of origin.
Another example comes from Gillers (1998) attempt to develop a center for
survivors of torture in Uganda. She quickly discovered that her Western-influenced focus on trauma was secondary to the poverty that pervasively and detrimentally affected the social functioning of community members. She also found that
individualized counseling interventions were culturally inappropriate and turned
to local community members to help her develop more culturally congruent and
accepted approaches to treatment. Thus, it is important for psychologists to supplant their view of self as expert with a role of partnership in addressing social concerns. This requires great efforts at familiarizing oneself with local people, customs, and resources. Furthermore, building on local resources and utilizing
culturally relevant interventions encourages sustainable social change as opposed
to maintaining externally imposed interventions that only temporarily alleviate
pain and suffering in the individual or the community. These examples highlight
the significance of constantly engaging in critical self-examination and collaborative dialogue that empowers oppressed groups.
Another ethical dilemma practitioners may encounter is defining what well-being means within a community. As previously mentioned, values and concepts of
justice vary across cultures and are subsequently not always congruent with Western thought and psychological perspectives. In communities where individual
identity is not recognized or embedded in collective well-being, clinicians must
actively work toward finding an ethical balance of conflicting values and needs.
For example, many human rights activists denounce the practice of female circumcisionfemale genital mutilation (FC/FGM) as medically and psychologically
damaging, and call for the eradication of this practice. Researchers have clearly
identified negative psychological consequences (e.g., anxiety, depression, and a
loss of self-esteem) of this practice, and a Western perspective might focus on the
girls or womans subordination through the practice, issues of powerlessness, and
the potential reproductive health hazards (Dorkenoo, 1995; Lightfoot-Klein,
1989). Though these issues merit attention, it is also important for researchers to
understand this practice in its full cultural context, and that includes understanding
what it would be like psychologically and socially for a girl not to be excised or infibulated. Such a girl is ostracized within her community and experiences a great
deal of anxiety and conflict (Dorkenoo, 1995). In cultures where wife and mother
are the primary identities and roles for women, not practicing FC/FGM denies her
a respectable position in society. Thus, it is important for a clinician to analyze the

RESPONSIBILITIES IN ISSUES OF SOCIAL JUSTICE

301

situation from multiple psychological and cultural perspectives before choosing a

course of action.
Similarly, Reynolds (1997) provided the story of an inyanga, a healer in
Zimbabwean culture, who decides to give an adolescent girl in marriage to a father
who lost his son during the liberation war. The arranged marriage was seen as an act
of compensation, because a member of the girls family, under the duress of torture,
revealed the location of freedom fighters. This revelation led to the sons death and
created unrest within the village. The arranged marriage would ensure that the fathers lineage could continue because the girl could bear more sons. A Western perspective may view this arrangement as a serious violation of the girls individual
rights, but if psychologists are not able to identify important cultural values of the
community, such as the desire to reestablish harmony, any form of intervention
would be unwelcome by or feel imposed on the community (Dawes, 2001). Such examples raise complex ethical issues, requiring the psychologist to negotiate between
cultures and work toward transformation and understanding. This goal speaks to the
importance of coconstructing change withrather than foroppressed communities (Comas-Das et al., 1998). Overall, these examples underscore the need to balance avoiding capitulation to injustice with recognizing the importance of different
ideologies as they affect individual and collective functioning.
A final clinical consideration is the common reactions psychologists working
with oppressed and abused populations have and how they may interfere with the
provision of useful clinical services (Pope & Garcia-Peltoniemi, 1991). For example, clinicians may have phobic reactions to hearing details of a clients experience
with torture. This reaction may be communicated implicitly or explicitly to the client, sending a message that such material is off limits for discussion in an effort to
protect the therapist from discomfort or distress. Alternatively, clinicians may be
overly curious about hearing the graphic details. In such instances, the therapists
voyeuristic needs are being met, potentially to the detriment of the client. It is also
important to monitor whether the clinicians political beliefs or prejudices could
impede the ability to provide ethical, appropriate, and helpful services. If so, the
clinician should refer the patient to another professional. Yet another danger exists
in a politicized therapist attempting to align or create solidarity with the victim,
because the therapist may attend primarily to the political agenda at the expense of
the clients psychological needs (Pope & Garcia-Peltoniemi, 1991). All of these
possibilities underscore the ethical principle of doing no harm and the critical need
for psychologists to monitor their boundaries of competence.
Individuals providing psychological therapy for trauma survivors face the emotional strain of hearing detailed accounts of inhumane atrocities, which can have a
significant impact on the therapists own feelings, relationships, and life. This phenomenon, often labeled secondary or vicarious traumatization, or compassion fatigue, can create feelings of guilt, depression, and anxiety, lead to professional
burnout, and diminish therapeutic effectiveness (Gorman, 2001; McCann &

302

KAKKAD

Pearlman, 1990). Many professionals working with survivors of torture, as well as

with women who have undergone FC/FGM, report such personal and professional
consequences of their work (Boehnlein, Kinzie, & Leung, 1998; Lightfoot-Klein,
1989). They subsequently bear an ethical responsibility to monitor their reactions,
seek appropriate peer support and professional consultation, and be cognizant of
remaining helpful and competent in their professional work. The Ethics Code cautions psychologists to be aware of the relationship between the quality of their professional services and personal well-being, as psychologists who are impaired are
at greater risk of making ethical violations (APA, 2002; Knapp & VandeCreek,
2003). In sum, when working with traumatized and oppressed groups, psychologists must be able to identify and bracket their own culturally derived reactions, assumptions, and values and actively seek knowledge from the client and other available resources on the clients historical and sociopolitical reality (Gorman, 2001).
Although the Ethics Code and related guidelines provide minimum standards for
the ethical practice of psychology, they may sometimes be insufficient or contraindicated when engaging in clinical work with culturally diverse individuals on issues of
social justice. The Ethics Code does not uniformly prohibit multiple relationships,
but cautions against entering into them when it may impair the professionals competence, objectivity, or effectiveness (APA, 2002). Therefore, when a psychologist
is working in a collectivistic culture in which dual relationships may be desirable and
essential to the delivery of helpful services, engaging in dual relationships would not
be unethical per se. Yet psychologists should not become complacent about doing
so, and must constantly assess how such relationships might impact their work and
the multiple individuals they are serving. In such situations, psychologists could
benefit from consultation and supervision from other colleagues. Another example
can be found in the Guidelines for Providers of Psychological Services to Ethnic,
Linguistic, and Culturally Diverse Populations, which states that psychologists do
not retain the services of translators/paraprofessionals who may have a dual role
with the client (APA, 1993, p. 46). Although the intent of this guideline is to avoid
jeopardizing the validity of such an intervention, it may inhibit trust building and
willingness to receive services. This example highlights the inadequacy of existing
ethical guidelines and the need for more practitioners to engage in critical dialogue
about such issues. Such dialogue can assist in developing alternative guidelines that
provide greater specificity about ethical decision making in emerging areas of psychological intervention, such as the provision of psychosocial services for refugee
populations and consultation on the best ethical practices for conducting interrogations with prisoners of war.
Expanded Roles
Maximizing psychologists impact in working toward social justice requires expanded visions of professional identities and roles to include activism through sensi-

RESPONSIBILITIES IN ISSUES OF SOCIAL JUSTICE

303

tization, consultation, and policy work (Wessells et al., 2001). This discussion will
explore the dissemination of psychological knowledge through these activities. Sensitization, or consciousness raising, can play an important role in the public dialogue
of redressing social issues. Policy is often driven by professionals with public policy
and law backgrounds, but mental health professionals can help identify psychological dimensions of such issues. Take, for example, war crime tribunals in the former
Yugoslavia, which put on trial individuals accused of gender-specific war crimes, including rape (Anderson & Richter-Lyonette, 1997, as cited in Wessells et al., 2001).
Originally, no witness support or protection was planned for women testifying about
their experiences of being raped. Through the efforts of an international group of
mental health professionals, accommodations were made to increase sensitivity to
the potential psychological consequences of testifying, and appropriate support was
subsequently provided. Psychologists can play similar roles in existing international
criminal tribunals and truth commissions in countries such as South Africa, Guatemala, and Rwanda, where survivors offer testimony of their experiences. Testimony
can help oppressed individuals overcome the isolation and secrecy often associated
with torture, empower them by giving voice to their experiences, and provide further
opportunities for therapeutic gain. Psychologists can also help sensitize other parties
involved in truth commissions, including lawyers, judges, and victimsfamily members, about the potential psychological consequences of testifying and help develop
guidelines to increase sensitivity about testifying.
Increased sensitization relies on the dissemination of psychological knowledge
through networking and the mass media. Wessells et al. (2001) highlight the need
for psychologists to develop and mobilize effective psychological organizations to
coordinate research, practice, training, and education efforts. Such organizations
include the Committee on Psychology in National and International Affairs,
American Psychologists for Social Action, Psychologists for Social Responsibility (PsySR), and the Peace Psychology Division of APA (Division 48; Jacobs,
1989; Wessells et al., 2001). Psychologists must continue such efforts and attempt
to expand participation of other psychologists within different subspecialties; they
must also build effective cross-disciplinary networks and alliances with mental
health professionals across international borders. PsySR has played a significant
role in peace building and prevention and has been able to mobilize during crises,
using its networks to quickly identify existing expertise in the area of interest and
incorporate diverse perspectives and knowledge of a multitude of professionals
(Wessells et al., 2001). Such collective efforts can potentially have a larger impact
than professionals acting independently or in isolation. Affiliating with organizations that have established credibility and that provide avenues for peer review and
inclusive dialogue enhances ethical and socially responsible involvement in such
public arenas (Wessells et al., 2001).
Mass media such as radio, television, magazines, and the Internet also provide
effective means to raise consciousness and encourage dialogue about socially rele-

304

KAKKAD

vant issues. Yet there exists a legitimate skepticism of using the media, born partially out of fear of misrepresentation or distortion of psychological knowledge.
There is particular concern of complex issues being reduced to media-friendly
sound bites that may further the agenda of the media itself, its sponsors, or of
those in power, such as federal organizations and agencies. If psychologists allow
others to interpret their research, they bear the ethical responsibility for accurate
use of such material (APA, 2002). Nevertheless, in this media-driven age of technological advances, increased globalization, and more immediate access to news
and information, psychologists cannot ignore the important platform the media
provides. Mental health professionals must find responsible ways to join the media
boom and seize the opportunity to disseminate knowledge of human behavior to a
wider audience. For example, when the story of prisoner abuse by military personnel at Abu Ghraib became headline news, politicians, legal experts, religious leaders, and other professionals openly conjectured about what caused the soldiers to
act so inhumanely. Why are the voices of psychologists, who are experts on human
behavior, missing from such debates and discussions? Though Zimbardo (2004a,
2004b, 2004c) offered some psychological insight on this specific matter based on
extremely relevant social psychological research conducted over 25 years ago
(Haney, Banks, & Zimbardo 1973), psychologists remain relatively invisible on
such matters in the public forum. Similar issues and questions frequently appear in
the news and reflect concerns of the larger public: What leads individuals to perform terrorist acts? What roles do misperceptions have in creating and maintaining
ethnic hostilities? Psychology might not hold all the answers to such questions, but
it certainly provides great insight into these complex issues of human behaviors,
and psychologists can play a more active role in accurately sharing such knowledge with the public.
Currently, the public face of psychology is dominated by stereotyped images
of pop psychology figures who have their own television or radio programs. In
recent years, psychologists have also been invited to appear more frequently on
morning or evening news programs, addressing individual psychological responses to specific topics such as coping with the effects of divorce, treating
learning disabilities in children, and enhancing communication in relationships.
But why are psychologists not contributing more to the larger debates on important social issues such as education reform, health care, and war, and the
psychosocial consequences that these issues have on our individual and collective lives? Addressing these broader themes is an important component of understanding structural inequalities and how they relate to social justice work. Ultimately though, psychologists who use the media must carefully weigh the risks
of utilizing these outlets and take the necessary precautions to avoid abuse or
misrepresentation of their knowledge or expertise.
Consultation is also an important professional activity for psychologists involved in the public arena. For example, psychologists may be asked to develop in-

RESPONSIBILITIES IN ISSUES OF SOCIAL JUSTICE

305

tervention strategies to improve race relations within a community or to reduce incidents of violence within a school system. Psychologists can also work as consultants to international and local nongovernmental agencies to address war trauma
and the reconstruction and reconciliation of war-torn communities (Wessells et al.,
2001). Such participation includes training, education, program design and evaluation, and human rights monitoring. Inherent in professionals involvement in such
efforts is the potential for cultural bias and power differentials. Western-trained
psychologists working in other countries must be cognizant of the power asymmetry between the psychologists and the local communities in which they work.
Though oppressed populations may reject or be skeptical of Western influence and
intervention, they may equally be deferential to external experts and silence their
own voices (Wessells et al., 2001). This silence may marginalize important local
perspectives of cultural practices that could contribute to the psychosocial well-being of individuals or the community.
A specific example comes from Dawes (2001), who relates the experience of
Western psychologists deployed in African war zones for the purpose of training
local health care workers in trauma work. Some of these psychologists may not
recognize two assumptions they impose in the community: (a) Local workers need
skills development and (b) traditional knowledge of trauma response indigenous to
the area is somehow inadequate or lacking. Furthermore, Western psychologists
serving as trainers often have power to give employment to individuals in a
war-torn community that has scarce employment opportunities. Local individuals
might subsequently silence their knowledge of locally accepted customs and ways
of helping in an effort to demonstrate their new skills and to secure employment
(Dawes & Honwana, 1998). Though no harm is intended, a set of values and ideas
might be imposed on a community, creating new definitions of distress and healing, consequently disempowering the very community the psychologists intended
on helping. Thus, well-intentioned psychologists may perpetuate injustices based
on class, wealth, power, race, and ethnicity. It is therefore critical for psychologists
to work in partnership with the communities they serve, rather than blindly imposing Western standards of intervention. Psychologists can accomplish this goal by
familiarizing themselves with the culture of the community before beginning their
work; making alliances with local mental health professionals, spiritual leaders,
and citizens of the affected community; being open to adapting their interventions
to respect local values and customs; and seeking additional supervision on consultation if needed.
Education
The complexity, thoughtfulness, and competence required for the ethical practice
of psychologists on issues of social justice speaks to the need for increased responsibility in the education and training of students of psychology. These issues need

306

KAKKAD

to be more present in graduate coursework, professional journals and publications,

and conferences. Multicultural awareness and related ethical considerations must
not be marginalized to an ancillary course, but must be thoroughly integrated into
graduate school curricula. More controversial may be the need to increase awareness of social responsibility of our profession, as highlighted in the Preamble and
General Principles of the Ethics Code (APA, 2002). Currently, students of psychology are not encouraged to examine the theory, research, and practice of activism. How then, can the knowledge of psychologists integrate into the larger landscape of social issues and leadership? As Pederson (1995) highlighted, if the
problem with the Ethics Code is not the principles and standards, but rather their
appropriate application in practice, perhaps this problem should be more explicitly
addressed in the standards about education and training. This issue of educating
future professionals in psychology to be more aware of and involved in issues of
social justice is essential in a world increasingly plagued by the long-term and devastating effects of racism, discrimination, poverty, violence, and war.

CONCLUSION
This discussion has attempted to identify, challenge, and clarify ethical issues related to psychologists responsibility toward issues of social justice. Professionals
in psychology must engage in a more intentional dialogue on the ethics related to
this type of work, mobilize all its members from various subspecialties to achieve
this task, and subsequently evolve their participation for the advancement of social
justice and peace. Psychologists possess an extensive knowledge base and have developed various tools relating to values, attitude change, motivation, trauma, conflict resolution, and other psychological dimensions of social activism that can enter public discourse and help effect change. More specifically, psychologists can
contribute to understanding the roots of violence; focus more theory and research
on the positive constructs of peace and nonviolence; help rebuild war-torn communities; address ethnic, racial, and religious hostilities; develop and implement effective nonviolent conflict resolution; empower marginalized voices; lobby for social justice; and become increasingly sensitized to their own ethnocentrism
(Winter et al., 2001). Many promising avenues exist to begin accomplishing these
tasks, beginning with more critical discussion among professionals within the field
of psychology, consulting with professionals from other disciplines, and developing alliances across international borders with mental health professionals from
other countries. Such dialogue will help clarify the emerging ethical issues related
to psychologists working toward social justice, and will inform the expanding
roles of psychologists as lobbyists, advocates, consultants, and educators. Though
there are numerous potential ethical challenges associated with this type of work,
psychologists should not abdicate their professional responsibility and must in-

RESPONSIBILITIES IN ISSUES OF SOCIAL JUSTICE

307

creasingly define the contours of a new ethical praxis that incorporates social justice and activism into its larger identity.

REFERENCES
American Psychological Association. (1993). Guidelines for providers of psychological services to
ethnic, linguistic and culturally diverse populations. American Psychologist, 48, 4548.
American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct.
American Psychologist, 47, 10601073.
Amnesty International. (2004). Amnesty International annual report 2004. Retrieved July 6, 2004,
from http://www.amnestyusa.org/annualreport/index.html
Anderson, A., & Richter-Lyonette, E. (1997). The war crime of rape. Reconciliation International,
12(3), 2021.
Boehnlein, J. K., Kinzie, J. D., & Leung, P. K. (1998). Countertransferance and ethical principles for
treatment of torture survivors. In J. J. Jaranson & M. K. Popkin (Eds.), Caring for victims of torture
(pp. 129140). New York: Hemisphere.
Bowlby, J. (1979). The making and breaking of affectional bonds. London: Tavistock.
Comas-Das, L., Lykes, M., & Alarcn, R. (1998). Ethnic conflict and the psychology of liberation in
Guatemala, Peru, and Puerto Rico. American Psychologist, 53, 778792.
Dawes, A. (2001). Psychologies for liberation: Views from elsewhere. In D. J. Christie, R. V. Wagner,
& D. D. Winter (Eds.), Peace, conflict, and violence: Peace psychology for the 21st century (pp.
295306). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Dawes, A., & Honwana, A. (1998). Children, culture and mental health: Interventions in conditions of
war. In B. Efraime, P. Riedesser, J. Walter, H. Adam, & P. Steudtner (Eds.), Children, war, and persecution: Rebuilding hope (pp. 7481). Maputo, Mozambique: AMOZAPO.
DeLeon, P. H., OKeefe, A. M., VandenBos, G. R., & Kraut, A. G. (1996). How to influence public policy: A blueprint for activism. In R. P. Lorion, I. Iscoe, P. H. DeLeon, & G. R. VandenBos (Eds.), Psychology and public policy (pp. 263280). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Dorkenoo, E. (1995). Cutting the rose: Female genital mutilation, the practice and its prevention. London: Minority Rights Publications.
Giller, J. (1998). Caring for victims of torture in Uganda: Some personal reflections. In P. Bracken & C.
Petty (Eds.), Rethinking the trauma of war (pp. 128145). London: Free Association Books.
Gorman, W. (2001). Refugee survivors of torture: Trauma and treatment. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 32, 443451.
Haney, C., Banks, W., & Zimbardo, P. (1973). Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology and Penology, 1, 6997.
Hogg, M., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications: A social psychology of intergroup relations and
group processes. London: McGraw-Hill.
Jacobs, M. S. (1989). American psychology in the quest for nuclear peace. New York: Praeger.
James, W. (1995). The moral equivalent of war. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 1,
1726. (Original work published 1910)
Kimmel, P. R. (1995). Sustainability and cultural understanding: Peace psychology as public interest
science. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 1, 101116.
Knapp, S., & VandeCreek, L. (2003). An overview of the major changes in the 2002 APA ethics code.
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 34, 301308.
Lightfoot-Klein, H. (1989). Prisoners of ritual: An odyssey into female genital circumcision in Africa.
New York: Harrington Park.

308

KAKKAD

McCann L., & Pearlman, L. (1990). Vicarious traumatization: A framework for understanding the psychological effects of working with victims. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 3, 131149.
Miller, G. A. (1969). Psychology as a means of promoting human welfare. American Psychologist, 24,
10631075.
Pederson, P. B. (1995). Culture-centered ethical guidelines for counselors. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M.
Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (pp. 3449).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Pope, K. S., & Garcia-Peltoniemi, R. E. (1991). Responding to victims of torture: Clinical issues, professional responsibilities, and useful resources. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 22,
269276.
Reynolds, P. (1997). Children and traditional healing in Zimbabwe. Athens: Ohio University Press.
Seligman, M. (1998). Ethnopolitical warfare [Presidents Column]. APA Monitor, 29(3), 2.
Sue, D. W., Arredondo, P., & McDavis, R. J. (1995). Multicultural counseling competencies and standards. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (pp. 624644). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Suedfeld, P., & Tetlock, P. E. (1992). Psychologists as policy advocates: The roots of controversy. In P.
Suedfeld & P. E. Tetlock (Eds.), Psychology and social policy (pp. 130). New York: Hemisphere.
Wessells, M., Schwebel, M., & Anderson, A. (2001). Psychologists making a difference in the public
arena: Building cultures of peace. In D. J. Christie, R. V. Wagner, & D. D. Winter (Eds.), Peace, conflict, and violence: Peace psychology for the 21st century (pp. 350362). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
White, R. K. (1977). Misperceptions in the Arab-Israeli conflict. Journal of Social Issues, 33, 190221.
Winter, D. D., Christie, D. J., Wagner, R. V., & Boston, L. B. (2001). Conclusion: Peace psychology for
the twenty-first century. In D. J. Christie, R. V. Wagner, & D. D. Winter (Eds.), Peace, conflict, and
violence: Peace psychology for the 21st century (pp. 363371). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Zimbardo, P. G. (2004a, May 17). Moral conscience and the war in Iraq: The virtue of action. San Francisco Chronicle, p. B7.
Zimbardo, P. G. (2004b, May 9). Power turns good soldiers into bad apples. Boston Globe, p. D11.
Zimbardo, P. G. (2004c). A situationist perspective on the psychology of evil: Understanding how good
people are transformed into perpetrators. In A. G. Miller (Ed.), The social psychology of good and
evil (pp. 2150). New York: Guilford.