A Psychological Look Inside the Movie ‘Good Will Hunting’ Essay

In the film, Good Will Hunting, main type Will Hunting is a troubled young man from a poor neighborhood in south Boston. Following a offspring of abusive foster care experiences and only himself left to trust, Hunting leads a life of self-sufficiency becoming a witty sharp shooter. A seemingly independent individual working as a janitor in renowned local university, MIT, he spends his downtime with a select group of buddies he considers family or isolated reading volumes of old novels and textbooks. Upon being found as the secret sleuth to a graduate level mathematics problem, MIT professor Gerald Lambeau seeks out the janitor, Hunting, in efforts to engage his mind and require him an apprentice. As the patch twists, an earlier issue lands Hunting facing jail time for assaulting an officer during a fight in his neighborhood. With knowledge of this, Prof. Lambeau uses his university standing and professional realise to all in allow a proposition to be offered to Hunting that L ambeau believes to be inversely beneficial Hunting is freed from jail time under the stipulations that he workings with Lambeau academically and sees a therapist for counseling purposes, simultaneously. Initially standoffish, Hunting doesnt seem pursualed, meanwhile a recent new love interest sways his thinking and he accepts Prof.Lambeau and the courts offer. While there seem to be a few dilemmas listed above, including the professors initial interest in offering a diminish jail sentence for his potential protg, the intent of his proposal was non for sole self-interest if the viewer understands his point of view and life experience. In his opinion, what person could possibly turn down an opportunity to work immediately with an MIT professor and for free? For the purposes of this paper, the ethical dilemma discussed is what happens next in the plan of Good Will Hunting, and that is when Will (who burns through multiple therapists earlier connecting with one) and his eventual Psychologist, Sean Maguire begin working together. Two major occurrences happen, one is that in an early meeting between the two, Hunting begins to test Maguire in efforts to make him lose his temper and it works. By discussing a painting in Maguires office that holds emotional value, Hunting is able to prod the weak areas of Maguires past and after he could no longer take it, he became irate and somaticly restrained Hunting by the throat.To quickly go over this and how it relates to the AmericanPsychological Associations Ethical article of beliefs of Psychologists and enactment of Conduct, this seemingly obvious violation is of course beyond all measures of intentions of luck but is also cited in Standard 3 Human dealing (APA autograph of Ethics, 2014) in 3.04 Avoiding Harm Psychologists take reasonable steps to stay off harming their clients/patients, students, supervisees, research participants, organizational clients and other with whom they work, and minimize harm where it is foreseeable and unavoidable. In order to avoid such a situation, beyond the realm of Hollywood dramatization, a simple separation of the two people (professional and patient/client) to assemble thoughts, breathe and reevaluate the circumstances would have been an appropriate alternative to physical contact. A separate yet major occurrence of ethical standards in the film involves the follow through of professional service to Hunting by Maguire as he deemed necessary when the role of Prof.Lambeau intended cessation of therapy so he could carry out his own prerogative. Maguire positively maintained the louver foundational general principles as found in the APAs Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct Principle A Beneficence and Nonmaleficence seek to safeguard the eudaimonia and rights of those with whom they interact professionally Principle B Fidelity and Responsibility implicated about the ethical compliance of their colleagues scientific and profession al conduct Principle C Integrity strive to keep their promises and to avoid unwise or unclear commitments Principle D Justice exercise reasonable sagaciousness and take precautions to ensure that their potential biases, the boundaries of their competence and the limitations of their expertise do non lead to or condone unjust practices. Principle E take note for Peoples Rights and Dignity respect the dignity and worth of all people, and the rights of individuals to privacy, confidentiality, and self-determination.