Short bio:
Adrian Toh demonstrates unwavering dedication throughout his extensive journey in psychology. With a wealth of experience as a Clinical Psychologist, Adrian not only practices but also provides supervision and guidance to colleagues and post-graduate students. His compassionate approach has profoundly impacted individuals navigating mental health and chronic health conditions, particularly in his expertise in managing Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD) and anxiety disorders.
Beyond clinical practice, Adrian’s passion for psychology extends to academia, where he plays a meaningful role in educating and mentoring the next generation of psychologists. Through his lectures and research endeavours, he consistently demonstrates a steadfast commitment to knowledge dissemination and the cultivation of future professionals. Adrian’s research not only enhances our understanding of psychological phenomena but also provides actionable insights for real-world application.
In addition to his substantive contributions, Adrian holds prestigious leadership position of President in both the Singapore Psychological Society (SPS) and the ASEAN Union of Psychological Societies (ARUPS). Through his leadership, he actively advocates for the advancement of psychological research and practice within Singapore and the broader ASEAN region. Adrian spearheads initiatives aimed at fostering the evolution of the psychology landscape, highlighting his unwavering dedication to shaping the future of the field.
Adrian’s blend of clinical expertise, academic dedication, and leadership abilities humbly contribute to the psychology community, fostering positive change on both local and regional levels.
Psychology Ethical Desicion-making Process in Singapore
Abstract:
Existing ethical codes offer foundational guidance for psychologists, yet they often lack specificity for effective decision-making. Despite expert-recommended decision-making models, there’s a notable absence of a culturally and contextually sensitive ethical framework in Singapore’s psychology landscape. This gap may lead to prolonged ethical issue resolution, posing risks of consequential errors for psychologists, clients, and the profession. This qualitative study explores ethical decision-making among local psychologists through semi-structured interviews with 14 registered practitioners. The research delves into the richness of their perspectives on ethical dilemmas, examining contributing factors in their decision-making process. The study identified common ethical decision-making factors, such as reviewing guidelines and assessing consequences, aligning with existing literature. Additionally, unique factors emerged, reflecting Asian values: considerations of the therapeutic relationship, discussing dilemmas with clients and professionals, reviewing organization guidelines, and assessing the decision’s impact on the psychology community. These factors, influenced by Asian values like family, face-saving, and social harmony, highlight culturally specific dimensions in ethical decision-making among practitioners in this study. A comprehensive decision-making model was formulated based on the emerged thematic information from the study as well as the factors identified in the literature. The study uncovered both conventional and culturally specific factors influencing ethical decision-making among local psychologists. Common themes, in line with existing literature, included reviewing legal and ethical guidelines and examining consequences. Unique to this study were factors rooted in Asian values, like the emphasis on the therapeutic relationship, discussing dilemmas with clients and peers, reviewing organizational guidelines, and considering the decision’s impact on the broader psychology community. These culturally influenced factors are closely tied to Asian values such as family, face-saving, respect for seniority, social obligations, and relations characterized by harmony, cooperation, loyalty, reciprocity, and the concept of “guanxi.” The findings highlight the importance of cultural nuances in ethical decision-making processes.