Mumford is an American comedy movie composed and directed by Lawrence Kasdan. The film is set in a small but vibrant Oregon town that has received a new resident and psychologist (Loren Dean), who offers offbeat pieces of advice to other residents. The newcomer to the small Oregon town carries the same name as the town, Mumford. The psychologist, Dr. Mumford, appears skillful and charming to his patients and neighbors (“Please wait..,” n.d.). He provides a frank, honest, and unique approach to psychotherapy and starts drawing patients away from the two existing therapists in Mumford (Jane Adams and David Paymer). Soon, he becomes popular and treats various conditions such as obsession, unhappy marriages, and compulsive shopping. This essay discusses the ethical challenges faced by the professionals in the film and analyzes whether or not they acted ethically.
After moving to the town, Mumford gets involved in many ethically questionable activities throughout his life and career as a psychologist and therapist. He became very popular after a few months of engaging with the residents despite the unconventional methods of treatment he used (“Please wait..,” n.d.). However, he is patient, insightful, and listens carefully to his clients. His patients include a wealthy compulsive shopping woman, a pharmacist living in a fantasy, a teen trying to imitate fashion models, a lonely billionaire called Skip, and a beautiful young lady suffering from severe fatigue syndrome.
Mumford’s unethical actions in his line of duty as a therapist include having a sexual relationship with his partner’s wife and patient, assuming a new identity to avoid his problems, and having a severe drug addiction. Mumford’s worst unethical conduct was to pretend to be a licensed psychologist (“Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct,” n.d.). The psychologist makes a mockery out of his clients’ mental illnesses while violating the trust of his patient, partners, and neighbors. He treats many patients throughout Mumford and begins deceiving them with irrelevant pieces of medical advice. He steals other psychologists’ businesses by drawing customers away, yet he is not a licensed or qualified psychologist. Mumford has no legal authority and licenses to treat patients for money.
Mumford lacked the relevant qualification and licenses to serve his patients. According to the second section of Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, Boundaries of Competence, psychologists are only allowed to offer services, conduct research, and teach their populations based on their training, education, and within the boundaries of their competence. They should also offer their services based on supervised experience, study, consultation, and professional experience (“Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct,” n.d.). Concerning Mumford’s assumption of a new identity to avoid his problems, the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct dictate that psychologists must refrain from service when they are aware that their problems will bar them from service in a competent manner. In the film, Mumford moves into a new town under a new identity, sets an office, and embarks on his services as a psychologist unlawfully.
Additionally, despite being aware of his challenges, he did not take appropriate measures to acquire professional assistance as dictated by the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Concerning Mumford’s sexual intimacy with a client, section ten states that psychologists should not engage in sexual intimacy with patients, clients, or former partners for at least two years after termination or cessation of therapy (“Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct,” n.d.). Mumford went against this code to have an affair with his patient, who was also his partner’s wife.
In the film, Mumford seems to be mocking what psychologists stand for, which is morally wrong. It is unethical because people with mental illnesses require specialized care from qualified physicians. It would have been worse if he encountered a patient with a severe mental disorder. Some mental disorders, such as Schizophrenia, are very dangerous because patients live in hallucinations. Mumford would not have known the best approach for such patients since he is not a qualified therapist and psychologist. On the contrary, the psychologist makes mental illnesses such as anxiety and depression look unreal and unimportant (“Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct,” n.d.). Passing such information to mentally ill patients can lead to serious actions such as suicide since they will think they are denied the necessary help.
Lying about his professional credentials and qualifications and lacking the necessary license put his life and his patients at risk since he is not qualified to handle their problems. Therapy and psychology are considered unique helping professions, and utilization of a code of ethics does not reflect this uniqueness. Therefore, it was important to approve the ethical standards of human service professionals. The central values of the human service profession include welfare and respect for clients, self-determination, social justice, and honoring cultural diversity (Burke, n.d.). Above all, professionals should act with objectivity, honesty, integrity, and genuineness. Additionally, sexual relationships with previous patients, residents, clients, and consumers translate to dual relationships. Mumford got into an intimate relationship with a client, which led to a sexual relationship. Intimate relationships with clients are not in their best interest since it interferes with quality service delivery and problem-solving. Sexual relationships with a client compromise the responsibility, reasoning, and judgment of a client.
Mumford lacked in his competence and responsibility by violating the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. According to these codes, human service professionals should avail their qualifications and certification to the public accurately (Burke, n.d.). Apart from the degree certificate he displayed on the wall; he lacked a professional disclosure statement (Burke, n.d.). The disclosure statement was necessary to list his credentials for the client to see and judge whether he was competent and qualified to handle their illnesses. Although the patients he treated through counseling and diagnosis became healthier, he failed to observe the ethical standards for psychologists.
In conclusion, the Film Mumford may be full of controversies and unethical behavior, but it is engaging and enjoyable. The dialogue and characters provide a delicate blend of entertainment and realism. Moreover, the cast provides a beautiful delivery of the author’s analysis of the human condition. The film has no big climax or crisis, and it makes the audience feel good (“Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct,” n.d.). It is a mood and feeling movie with the type of interactions the audience sometimes tong for. The movie comes in an age when people have no time for each other and people have an urgent need for electronics. It also comes in a period when getting someone’s attention requires walking away and making a phone call. However, Mumford goes beyond all these odds to listen to his clients, whose questions and requests are nudged towards health and healing.
References
Burke, A. (n.d.). Ethical standards for HS professionals. Home.
Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. (n.d.).
Please wait. (n.d.). Please Wait… | Cloudflare.