The NCGR Code of Ethics / NCGR倫理守則

Guidelines for the Resolution of Ethical Dilemmas and Complaints.



An ethical dilemma is a problem that an astrologer is having in deciding on an ethically proper course of action. This could have to do with a particular situation confronting the astrologer, or with ethical conduct in general. There may be a question about interpreting a particular section of the code, about resolving a difficult ethics-related situation, or about resolving a conflict between two different sections of the code. An Ethics Resolution Coordinator (i.e., a member of the Ethics Resolution Committee) serves as a resource for resolving dilemmas. When an NCGR member is faced with an ethical dilemma, he or she may seek help from anyone, but the Coordinator will offer advice when asked. It is to be understood that such inquiries are for the NCGR member’s own information so that they can make up their own mind as to what to do. They are under no requirement to follow the Coordinator’s advice. The Coordinator is offering advice, not dictating conduct. It is also to be understood that all inquiries are considered absolutely confidential. For added assurance of confidentiality, an NCGR member may seek advice through a friend or colleague speaking on their behalf. The goal here is to help to raise the level of ethical awareness among NCGR members through open discussion of problems.



A complaint is a request for assistance from someone such as a client or student who feels there has been unethical conduct by an NCGR member. The job of the Ethics Resolution Coordinator is only to resolve complaints. He or she cannot be the one to lodge a complaint. The Coordinator is not a policeman. Generally, complaints can be of 3 types: 1) personal, 2) general, and 3) third party.



  1. Personal complaints come from a person who is personally and directly affected by the actions or statements in question. In an informal discussion with the person making the complaint, the Coordinator first determines if the complaint is covered by the code, and which sections of the code may be relevant. The Coordinator then discusses with the complainant various informal options for resolving the issue. For example, the complainant may simply decide to have the Coordinator bring the matter to the attention of the astrologer in question. Or, if the complainant feels more strongly, the Coordinator may offer to set up a mediation session to resolve the matter. At this stage the Coordinator acts as an objective middle person between the two parties involved. If an informal solution is not workable or acceptable to the complainant, a formal complaint can be initiated. However, the Coordinator should make every effort to find an informal solution first.

1. 個人申訴來自於當事人本身直接受到行 為或陳述的影響,在與申訴人非正式討論時,調解人先確定其申訴是否屬於守則範圍內,以及與守 則裡的哪一條文是相關的。調解人接著與申訴人討論,透過各種非正式選項來解決爭議。例如:申訴人可以單純的決定由調解人將此事提醒被申訴的占星師,或是, 如果申訴人感覺更嚴重,調解人可以籌備一個協調會來解決問題。在這階段,調解人扮演雙方當事人的客觀中間人角色。如果非正式解決方案不可行,或不被申訴人 接受,可以進入正式的申訴案;然而調解人應先盡一切所能以非正式方案來解決。


  1. General complaints can come from anyone acting on behalf of the public at large regarding things that affect groups of people in general rather than someone in particular, such as false advertising or unethical public statements. The first step here is to collect the facts and evaluate whether or not the complaint is covered by the ethics code. If so, the Coordinator then tries to make informal contact with the member in question to discuss the matter. In this informal context the coordinator tries to work out an acceptable solution. The Coordinator acts here as representative of the board of directors with full authority to resolve the matter. The Coordinator’s acceptance of an informal solution will be considered acceptable to the NCGR board of directors as well. If an informal solution is not worked out, the coordinator discusses the matter with the Executive Committee to decide upon more formal action. This can include a letter of concern, warning or censure, or in a very serious case, a formal hearing or revocation of membership

2.普遍性申訴可能是來自某一個為了公眾代言的人,針對某件會影響群眾的事件,而不是單一個案,例如錯誤的廣告或是違反倫理的公開論述。首先是收集事證,並評估 是否在倫理守則的範圍內。如果是,調解人會試著以非正式方式和被申訴的會員討論。在這個非正式的場合,調解人會試著找出可接受的解決方式。調解人在此扮演 充分獲得董事會授權之代表來解決問題,調解人所接受的非正式解決方案則將被認為NCGR董事會也是可接受的。如果非正式解決方案無法成立,調解人會和執行委員會討論出一個更正式的行動,可能是一封關切、警告或譴責的信函,或在一個非常嚴重的狀況下,舉辦一場正式的公聽會或撤銷會員資格。

  1. Complaints might also come from a third party regarding someone else, such as an astrologer who hears about a potential ethical violation through a client. The Ethics Resolution Committee cannot act on this. A third party complaint that cannot be verified by the person directly involved must be considered hearsay. However, a coordinator may be able to arrange through the third party for the person directly affected to come forth with their complaint in a way that feels safe to them. In fact the coordinator should make every effort to do so. Then the matter can be handled as a personal complaint.

3.申 訴可能來自於與某人有關的第三方,例如一位占星師從客戶那聽到一個可能違反倫理的事件。倫理判決委員會不能對此行動。第三方申訴人如果不能被確認是和特定 人士有關,則該申訴只能被認定為道聽塗說。然而,調解人可透過第三方和直接被影響的特定人士,以他們覺得安全的方式來處理申訴案。事實上,調解人應該盡力 而為,如此,該事件可被視為是個人申訴案件。