Ethical Decision-Making Model: Counseling Case Study
Three named components, more than two principles, and a case where confidentiality and protection genuinely conflict. Naming a decision without walking the model is the failure this is built to catch.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · August 16, 2026
Three components, more than two principles, and one case
The assignment counts things, so count them as you write: three components of the decision-making model — moral awareness, moral judgement and ethical behaviour — and more than two ethical principles, with autonomy and nonmaleficence named as compulsory. That means at least three principles, so add beneficence, justice or fidelity and use it rather than listing it. Moral awareness is recognising that a situation has an ethical dimension at all, and in this case it is not subtle: a minor has disclosed a sexual assault and asked that nobody be told. Moral judgement is reasoning to what ought to be done, and this is where the model earns its place, because the answer is not obvious and the counsellor's discomfort is not a guide. Ethical behaviour is acting on the judgement, which is a separate step precisely because people frequently know what is right and do not do it.
Work the conflict rather than resolving it too quickly. Autonomy supports the client's request: she is seventeen, she disclosed in confidence, and overriding her wishes may end the only relationship in which she has spoken about this. Nonmaleficence cuts both ways, which is what makes the case hard — disclosure risks harm through loss of trust and loss of control over her own story, while non-disclosure risks harm from an ongoing threat and from her deteriorating function. Beneficence points to what actually helps rather than what she asks for. Then bring in the legal layer, which is not the same as the ethical one: mandated reporting obligations for minors vary by jurisdiction and by what is disclosed, and the professional codes require you to know them. Note that the third component is action — say what you would actually do, including how you would tell her, since telling her before you report is itself an ethical act.
Likely learning objectives
Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.
- 01Apply the three components of an ethical decision-making model in sequence.
- 02Use at least three ethical principles as analytic tools rather than labels.
- 03Distinguish ethical obligations from legal reporting requirements.
- 04Specify the action taken, including how it is communicated to the client.
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
Turn the brief into deliverables
- 01A summary of the case facts.
- 02Moral awareness: what makes this an ethical situation.
- 03Moral judgement: reasoning to what ought to be done.
- 04Ethical behaviour: the action and how it is carried out.
- 05At least three ethical principles applied, including autonomy and nonmaleficence.
- 06The legal reporting position, distinguished from the ethical analysis.
Facts, then the model applied step by step
The facts
Summarise the case without interpreting it.
Moral awareness
Identify what makes this an ethical situation and for whom.
The principles in conflict
Apply autonomy, nonmaleficence and at least one more.
Moral judgement
Reason to a conclusion using the model's steps.
The legal layer
State the reporting obligation and how it interacts with the ethics.
Ethical behaviour
Say what you would do, and how you would tell the client.
Codes, statutes and the limits of confidentiality
Recommended databases
- American Counseling Association
- National Board for Certified Counselors
- PubMed Central
- Your state statutes
Search sequence
- 1.Read the relevant code sections on confidentiality and its limits.
- 2.Check the mandated reporting statute for minors in your jurisdiction.
- 3.Look up the decision-making model your course uses, in its own source.
- 4.Search for literature on disclosure and the therapeutic alliance.
Reference shortlist
These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.
Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.
- 01
Counseling Ethics
American Counseling Association · 2024
The code sections governing confidentiality, its limits and minors.
- 02
Ethics
National Board for Certified Counselors · 2025
Certification-body ethical requirements, including reporting obligations.
- 03
Patient Rights and Ethics
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf, US National Library of Medicine · 2023
Patient rights and ethics, including the principle framework applied clinically.
- 04
Individual Moral Philosophies and Ethical Decision Making of Undergraduate Athletic Training Students and Educators
Journal of Athletic Training · 2008
Empirical work on how individual moral philosophy shapes ethical decisions.
- 05
Electronic Health Record Adolescent Confidentiality in a Safety Net Setting
Applied Clinical Informatics · 2023
Confidentiality for minors in practice, and where systems compromise it.
Review before submission
Common mistakes
- Naming a decision without working through the three components.
- Listing principles instead of using them to generate the conflict.
- Treating the legal duty as settling the ethical question.
- Omitting how the client would be told, which is part of ethical behaviour.
Submission checklist
- Are all three components present and labelled?
- Have you used more than two principles, including the two required?
- Is the legal position stated separately from the ethical one?
- Does the paper say what you would actually do and say?
Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.
Written by
Aaron Bishop
MA, Education
assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines
Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.
Reviewed by
Dr. Nathan Cole
PhD, Rhetoric & Composition
Argumentation and thesis development
Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.