The ethics of forensic professionalism is often couched in terms of competing individual and societal values. Indeed, the welfare of individuals is often secondary to the requirements of society, especially given the public nature of courts of law, forensic hospitals, jails, and prisons. We explore the weaknesses of this dichotomous approach to forensic ethics, offering an analysis of Psychology's historical narrative especially relevant to the national security and correctional settings. We contend that a richer, more robust ethical analysis is available if practitioners consider the multiple perspectives in the forensic encounter, and acknowledge the multiple influences of personal, professional, and social values. The setting, context, or role is not sufficient to determine the ethics of forensic practice.

Transportation around campus on time is crucial for in-person college students looking to succeed in their studies. Unfortunately, inequities have arisen between the ability of able-bodied students to get to and from class and permanently or temporarily disabled students looking to do the same. ASU’s solution to this problem, the Disability Access and Resource Transportation (DART) service, does adequately address the needs of its targeted customers properly. Unfortunately, student surveys and anecdotal evidence from students’ lived experiences have demonstrated that DART often leaves students waiting for more than half an hour for a ride, causes students to miss class, and is altogether unreliable in today’s age where punctuality is key to success. Our goal in our thesis project was to create an equal on-campus transportation playing field for students with and without mobility issues so that a students’ ability to get around campus would never serve as a hindrance to his/her ability to, at a minimum, earn a degree; ideally empowering all students to thrive regardless of their personal circumstances.