Examination of ethics concerns moral decisions, generally in the field of relationships, parties' intentions, intentions and possible outcomes. In practice, this is the observation of the moral choices made by the people and the reason for these decisions. Ethical thinking is then responsible for the production of theories that serve or rely on the moral choice. In a practicing hypnosis therapist, the most important issue of ethical consideration concerns the basics of the therapist and the laws regulating clients' rights.
In the key elements of the ethical hypnotherapeutic practice of ethical guidelines we discuss below, we assume that county laws have priority. It is important, however, for the professional bodies to take responsibility for their members and to provide them with the limits within which they can legally and safely exercise and which ensure the physical and psychological safety of their clients.
In general, basic ethical guidelines in hypnosis therapy practice can be divided into two areas: one that the therapist practices in practice and two that the therapist behaves towards the client. This classification is made up of various professional bodies, including the NCHP (the College), the International Society of Professional Hypnosis (ISPH), the National Guild of Hypnotists & # 146; Code of Ethics and Standards (NGH) and the National Board of Professional and Ethical Standards & # 150; Hypnosis Education and Certification (NBPES). We focus on the guidelines outlined by NCHP, but where other bodies provide further guidance, these are particularly referred to in the second part of the paper.
The NCHP Code of Ethics consists of 17 points, two clauses outlining the consequences of breaking the code of ethics. The consequences of ignoring ethical guidelines are not important to discuss ethical issues and will no longer be dealt with.
The spirit of the whole material is contained in the dormitory statement as follows:  Each therapist is expected to approach their work with specific goals to alleviate suffering and promote customer welfare. Therapists should therefore strive to use the skills and skills that are appropriate to their competence. with the best advantage, without prejudice and with the recognition of the worth and dignity of all people. (NCHP, 2001).
The guidelines are obviously primarily helpful for the client, but it is obvious that therapists are protected by the insistence that they work within their sphere  Instead of symbolically reproducing the Academy's guidelines, using the aforementioned categories (practice / client) present the outline of the guidelines. It should be recalled that the border between the two categories is not always clear and that is the difference in comfort.
The rights of the client under sections 2, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10 and 11 require therapists to use only treatments that are known, secreted, parties and with the permission of the customer to maintain the appropriate personal boundaries (in all areas) and to ensure that clients are looking for them and, if so, keep their anonymity. None of these are a specific requirement for not harming the client in the process of relieving suffering.
NGH expressly states that "frightening, shocking, obscene, sexually suggestive, humiliating or humiliating suggestions can never be used with a hypnotized client and ISPH status." Proposals must be resolved, either hypnotic or otherwise, which are devastating or embarrassing . This is a potentially interesting area for the difference because it would in essence allow a therapist to work in the College's guidelines for "harmful" interventions when they fall within the scope of the therapists and ultimately lead to customer well-being and lack of suffering. the College's guidance seems to provide the client as far as reasonably possible to provide the protection of the undesirable, excessive output that could arise when hypnosis therapy was agreed upon
where it may be argued that there are loops, paragraphs 10 and 10. Point 5 deals with confidentiality and disclosure and expressly states: "It should be taken into account that the therapists are responsible to the general public as well as to individual customers. & # 148; Where is the boundary that separates the customer's responsibility and the responsibility of the community? If during a regression, the client finds that he was a victim of a serious crime and can identify the perpetrator if the therapist tries to persuade the client to contact the police? If the client finds out that he was a serious offender if the therapist contacted the police? If the therapist informs the client of any such case, if the client appears to have completely suppressed the information?
These concerns can affect the therapist's decisions about their own privacy limits, and this in turn change their practical ability.
Item 10 refers to the maintenance of clients. anonymity and prosperity when the case-based material is published. In principle, anonymity can be sustained by substituting a custom name. However, a detail of a case may be sufficient to guess the identity of a person (recent evidence of John Leslie and the cases of violence against premier footballers and Dr. David Kelly is evidence of this). This means that some of the interesting areas in the case should continue to be published, as individual customers will be identified too closely. The dilemma is therefore how we can guarantee that we maintain the quality of the published work without accidentally identifying the affected customers.
The Ethics Practice of Hypnosis-Psychotherapy is provided by the College on the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 8th, 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th, 16th and 17ths. The therapist's professionalism, Practical Practices and Practical Methods, the Need for Continuing Professional Development, Limitations of Advertising and Hypnosis as Entertainment, and Guidelines on Complaints about Counsel to a Therapist or Colleague
Essentially the issues that ensure therapists have the right qualifications to carry out their work to maintain their skills and business in a way that does not create the practice of a therapist, dormitory or hypnosis therapy. One interesting difference between the college and the ISPH is that the ISPH refers to the therapists qualified by the College for "Hypnotechnicians", ie not qualified doctors, psychiatrists or clinical psychologists. Why is it important that, according to the ISPH guidelines, hypnotherapy professionals should not undertake all therapeutic interventions;
"Regression" is not "hypnotic". Society sees the ages as a psychotherapist rather than a hypnotic because the technician can not handle the traumatic past experiences. Hypnotic age regression can only be performed in the direction and actual presence of MD, psychiatric clinics or psychologists. & # 148; (ISPH, 2003).
In addition to this distinction, the College and other bodies mentioned above agree with the ethics issues related to hypnotipotherapy.
A previous outline of ethical requirements has highlighted some areas where there is some concern about these issues and two of the issues at the center of the next debate. Firstly, regarding the inconvenience of the client in the process of change and the second with the ethics of regression practice.
As outlined by the Academy's guidelines, therapists are explicitly expected to alleviate suffering, # 148; and promote the well-being of their customers. # 148; At first glance, this may suggest that the process of hypnosis therapy must be without the loss of prosperity, although the nature of the discovery may not always be possible.
In some cases, how do we think dissolution is an unfortunate consequence of suffering relieving because the therapist does not always try to cause it, though this may be necessary for successful treatment. There is more concern about the necessity for the client to lose suffering and well-being in order to reach the customer's desired result.
For example, a well-known method based on sexual offenders, behavioral principles, aversion therapy (Marshall, Anderson, & Fernandez, 1999). This requires the perpetrator to imagine a scene in which they intend to violate them and then be asked to imagine the adverse outcome (for example, when approaching a child outside the school, the pedophile will be asked with their hands on their shoulders and turning, (see a police officer) or an aversive stimulus (electric shock, aversive odor, etc.). The idea that these odious results are coupled with offensive behaviors and hence the behavior is reduced. Likewise, humiliation is used to change the behavior of the existentialist.
In principle, we can apply the same approaches to hypnosis, hypnosis suggestions, etc. The ultimate goal is to alleviate the suffering that inappropriate thoughts and imaginations can cause to the customer and thus reduce the risk of the community. The College does not deal specifically with this issue, although it may be assumed that it does not intend to suffer clients, but other bodies deal with it. The NGH explicitly states that the hypnotized client should never be used with fearsome, astonishing, obscene, sexually suggestive, humiliating or humiliating suggestions. && 148;
In contrast, they also claim that members use hypnosis with clients to motivate them to eliminate negative or unwanted habits, facilitate the learning process, and so on. (NGH, 2002). Thus, in some areas where hypnosis may prove useful, it seems that there is a contradiction & # 150; the role of the therapist encourages the customer to change unwanted habits (or more generally behavioral behaviors), but the tools that are useful for this purpose are not available due to the customer's discomfort. The ethical issue is organized around two points: on the one hand, the relationship with the client, and on the other, the relationship with society. If the individual's right exceeds the potential benefits of many? So, would we need more concern for the client than our concern for potential victims? The dilemma is because we have to choose between two contradictory claims and results.
This was recognized by the ethical principle of Intuitionism (Moore, 1903) where an action is "right" if this is a "good" result; the problem is therefore which outcome is better In fact, it is more complex because such work could not be performed without the client's consent, so what is the therapist's position when the client demands that it be treated with a scary, startling, obscene, sexually suggestive, humiliating or humiliating • If you agree with this, and if so, what if another client requires other demands, for example, requiring that the lack of self-esteem would be alleviated if the therapist were engaged in sexual activity (See Note 1.)
To address this problem requires much longer consideration than is possible, although one approach may be to limit the interpretation of ethical guidelines (eg "at do not under any circumstances engage in sexual activity with a client, present or past) and, if necessary, place them on a case-by-case basis. For example, the issue of dealing with sexual offenders could be resolved if, in some cases, the use of negative substances is allowed. This is in line with Aristotle's ideas of "effective causes". and the ultimate cause. "
Understanding the ultimate cause or outcome is to lead us to know how to achieve it (through the effective cause) and this is the meaning and purpose of the ultimate cause that determines if it is ethically good. If it has been shown that ultimately positive outcomes, and if the client agrees, such interventions have proved to be appropriate and there are probably few other intervention areas where such images are useful and appropriate. Negative images can be used, for example, by a trained therapist for the treatment of sexual offenders, where it is clearly demonstrable whether the best form of treatment and the customer's written consent is either suffering from the sufferer or if he or she does not have a proper sexual imagination, it may be a useful first draft. Of course, before accepting it, it must be shown that such interventions really make the desired results.
The second area, where there is concern, the use of regression, the effects of regression on the use of the competent therapist, but there are two more areas of interest.
Firstly, ethics of regression, secondly, the assumption that the effects will be short to occur during treatment.
As described above, therapists ethically commit themselves to doing exercises that do not cause harm to the client, although it has been argued that in certain cases, if the result warrants this, this restriction can be resolved. The ethical problem related to regression (see note 2) is that neither the therapist nor the client knows what can wait for the client when he regresses. The latter question is important because it leads to an informed consent problem.
How can a customer be considered acceptable if they do not know what the outcome can be? The disadvantage is that the therapist does not know that the client's past is traumatic (and potentially scary, humiliating, sexual, etc.), does not know how this affects the client. And finally, whether the information being retrieved will be something , which the therapist can handle.
Although there may always be a customer referring to a trained therapist, this does not remove the ethical responsibility of the original therapist. The dilemma in this case is similar to the previous one, the main difference is that the decision to use negative images is used with empirical evidence, with the knowledge and consent of the client, while negative memories (and their nature and quality) can not be predicted , and no valid informed consent can be given.
It is of secondary importance what the therapist needs to be if the embedded memories are illegal, whether it is a client victim or a perpetrator, but this may, to a certain extent, be described in the description of the therapists of the Code of Conduct Code of Conduct. The problem with this specific ethical issue is that it is not possible to produce appropriate guidelines. It is not possible to ask therapists not to reveal potential negative and potentially harmful memories to clients because there is no way to reach this. All that can be done is for therapists to be able to handle these events.
However, there are circumstances in which this may not be possible. For example, humiliation, anger, sadness, etc. His feelings are reasonably dealt with in the therapeutic section, but the long-term emotional consequences may not necessarily be treated. If a customer has collected a painful memory that has badly hurt someone, this can change how they behave toward him or feel like an individual.
In serious cases, this may result in suicidal thoughts and suicide attempts. If the customer regains the memory of an individual who has been abused by them, they may choose to take revenge exactly from the hands of the therapist. If the client does not share these specific aspects of thinking with the therapist, either because they do not want or because they occur when the session is over or shared, but the therapist does not have the appropriate experience, it is obvious that the therapist no longer directs the this unintended consequence of regression.
These secondary or unintended effects were discussed by some philosophers. For example, St. Thomas Aquinas (1964) claimed that everything is regulated by a "natural law" where everything has the right end. With this argument, man is responsible for the immediate consequences of the actions, not for involuntary effects, and this is the law of Double Effect. Unfortunately, this argument does not really help the ethical responsibility of the regressive therapist and is certainly not suitable for solving the dilemma properly. The mere treatment of subsequent consequences is unlikely to be the guiding body of hypno-psychotherapy.
So how can we solve this dilemma? Logical postivism suggests that moral statements are meaningless, because neither tautologies nor empirical findings. So there are expressions of preferences and emotions (Thompson, 2003). In this situation, the best we can hope for is emotional-based preference systems.
It is not possible to cover all possible events, but it is also possible to provide preferred guidelines that outline the directions of action, and regression results prove negative for the client. Careful training of therapists to ensure that all therapists have a network of supporters, including relationships with therapeutic college staff experts, to prepare scenarios for worst cases for therapists. We also need to understand where the therapist's ethical responsibility ends. Should the therapists be responsible (whether ethically or emotionally or legally) for the behavior of the clients for a week, a month or a year after the treatment is completed? Hypnosis psychotherapists should consult with other professional bodies (the British Medical Association, the British Psychological Society, the Law Society, etc.) in order to inform the decision on the matter.
A brief overview of ethical guidelines and ethical issues in hypnosis therapy shows how difficult it is to legislate in interfering with other individuals. It is not limited to the practice of hypnosis-psychotherapy, but also in medicine and mental health. In some cases, we may make guidelines that allow the ethical management of clients and provide security for certain therapies, in some cases as in the second case, is not possible. Whichever method is to be taken into account as a template for hypnosis therapy practice and we must never forget that there are counting examples and exceptions when the therapist is responsible for discussing the matter with their supervisors and other trained therapists  Note 1 :
(According to a general principle of the NGH: "The rights and desires of clients must always be respected", but therapists warn that "a moral or sexual misconduct has been committed" is a client and the College warns that therapists need to maintain the right borders with their clients and make sure that they do not use their current or past clients, so the therapist is obliged instead of ethical guidelines to be absolute in this case.)
In this paper we assume that remembranced memories are real representations of st events. The debate on memories of memories raises another important ethical issue that requires a separate debate.
Aquinas, Saint Thomas General Editor: Thomas Gilby Summa Theologiae – Latin and English (1964). London: Blackfriars with Eyre & Spottiswoode.
Translated and edited by Aristotelian Roger Crisp. Nicomachean ethics. (2000). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Marshall, W. L., Anderson, D. & Fernandez, Y (1999). Cognitive behavioral treatment of sexual offenders. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Moore, G.E. (1903). Principia Ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
National College of Hypnosis and Psychotherapy (NCHP) (2001). Code of Ethics and Practice. [http://www.hypnotherapyuk.net/ethics.htm]
The International Industrial Hypnosis Society (ISPH) (1978) Code of Ethics and Standards. [http://www.iit.edu/departments/csep/PublicWWW/codes/coe/]
National Hypnotists Guild (NGH) (2004) Code of Ethics and Standards http://www.hypnosisunlimited.com/Hypnosis-How.html
The National Board of Professional and Ethical standards
Education and Certification of Hypnosis (NBPES) (2004). The National Code of Professional Ethics and Ethics – Ethics Standards. http://hypnosiseducation.com/
code% 20of% 20ethics.htm
Thompson, M. (2003). Ethics. London: Hodder Headline Inc.
Source by sbobet