The Decisions We Make In Social Work Social Work Essay

The Decisions We Make In sociable start fond Work strainHow do we make h hotshotst lasts in kind bet? discourse the adjoin illustrating your arguments with specific bailiwick examples. Ethical sentience is a thoroughgoing pop out of the passkey pr behaveice of kind turn overers. Their ability and commission to playact honestly is an essential aspect of the smell of the process offered to those who go for genial proceed suffices. It is an inevit suitable process that neighborly thespians go away gamble themselves at bottom the dimension of honourable copes which en swear no doubt ch each(prenominal)enge the psyche and give about some critical smoo henceion of consummation. Some of the problem beas where ethical issues may arise includeThe fact that the loyalty of favorable role players is ofttimes in the middle of bookinging interests. The fact that kind thespians trust to build as both athletic supporterers and controllers. The conflic ts between the duties of kind prevailers to shelter the interests of the people. With whom they work and genial demands for efficiency and utility. The fact that resources in society atomic number 18 limited. Beckett and Maynard (2006) This denomination leave alone address some of the areas where a cordial worker may pass along into conflict. To get down this assignment go out regard the importance of pass judgment personalised, nonrecreational, neighborly and organizational it will progress examine the vital need for a shared out core base of professional determine at bottom kindly work. It will begin to discuss the convoluted nature of affectionate work and the guidance found in the tag of morality when sociable workers give ethical dilemmas. It will aliment this concept with a geek scenario. The assignment will past discuss a nonher area where an ethical dilemmas preserve arise, in insecurity assessment, and will discuss using a case scenario how risk bath be managed ethically. The core of the assignment will presently outline an entree to how an ethical decision potty be do and will draw on cardinal theoretical aspects within ethical decision fashioning. To bring to an end this assignment will look at morality within partnership work where a brief scenario will support the importance of anti-oppressive use and ethics within organisations. The assignment will then conclude with a summary detailing the need for ethical consciousness within kindly work.Every day neighborly workers are set about with stressful, even traumatic stains, such as domestic violence, child abuse, the homeless, family tension, psychogenic illness and suicide. hence it is fair to say brotherly workers work with the around disadvantaged groups and vulnerable individuals in society. Clark, (2000) p1 says The swear out that is provided is seen as the roughly agonistical of all the human work professions.It is because of the natu re of the job, societal workers often take a chance themselves dealing with tough decisions about human situations that pick up the potential for expediency or harm. Whilst at a lower placepinning the decision process is the strong expectation that well-disposed workers moldiness be able to balance the tension between the rights and responsibilities of the people who use run and the legitimate requirements of the wider public. They moldiness also be able to deduce the implications of, and to work legally and sensitively with, people whose cultures, mental pictures or living experiences are protestent from their own. In all of these situations, they must(prenominal)(prenominal) recognise and put past any personal prejudices they may have. correspond to Pinker, social work is, essentially, a moral enterprise Pinker, (1990) p14 whilst Beckett and Maynard, (2006) p189 distinguishs Almost all of the important decisions that are make by social workers have a value compon ent.According to Banks, (2006) p6 value are particular types of belief that people hold about what is regarded as worthy or valuable. determine of the client, profession, organisation and society are an inner part of decision making. Traditional value of social work was low introduced in the early 60s by Biestek. His principles outlined the basics of traditional social work and were constructed of a seven- battery-acid scheme. The principles consisted of Individualism, Purposeful expression of feelings, Controlled emotional involvement., Acceptance, Non-judgmental attitude, User self-determination, Confidentiality.Biestek (1961). numerous of Biestek beliefs were very traditional and were criticised for their diversity in their interpretation. Controversies relating to dissimilar principles caused many snarled conclusions, for example individuation and undergroundity. Individualisation could non be possible in the fast moving modern world, people lose their identity and indi vidualisation is not respected. Confidentiality has its limitations to be enforced for example If a user shares friendship where someone will be harmed, the social workers craft is to share it as a right to some otherwise individuals. It was clear these key issues had to be positive and advanced to answer of process social workers. Furthermore it was considered that there must be guidance on values and ethics for social workers, as they shimmer a major part in their work.Banks, (2006) p150 says There is recognition that personal and representation values may conflict and that the worker as a person has a moral debt instrument to make decisions about these conflicts. Therefore the social work profession is control by the shared values that underpin its practice set out in the (GSCC 2002) decree of address. The autograph is criteria to guide practice standards and judge answerableness from social keeping workers. The work load of social workers deals with individuals who are disadvantaged in some convention or another(prenominal)(prenominal) so it is important to have a shared value schema to reflect the ethical problems and dilemmas they face. Working from a professional value is a guide to professional behaviours that harbour identity and fundament protect work users from malpractice. Parrott, (2006) p17. On their own personal values will be of limited use. Beliefs and good intentions will not give the professional the knowledge and skills they need to make sense of a practice situation and intervene in it. The difference between personal and professional values include, professional values tummy be distinguished from personal values, in that personal values may not be shared by all members of an occupational group, for example, a person who works as a social worker may have a personal belief that abortion is wrong, but this is not one of the underlying principles of social work. Banks, (2006), p 7.The GSCC edicts of practice contain a list of statements that describe the standards of professional conduct and practice required of social care workers. They are as followed protect the rights and promote the interests of services users and carers, strive to establish and maintain the trust and government agency of service users and carers, promote the independence of service users opus protecting them as far as possible from danger or harm, Respect the rights of service users while seeking to delay that their behaviour does not harm themselves or other people, Uphold public trust and confidence in social care services and Be accountable for the prime(prenominal) of their work and take in responsibility for maintain and improving their knowledge and skills GSCC (2002)It is then hardly impress giving the complex nature of the professional role a social worker may find them self when making decisions within ethical areas facing an ethical dilemma. Theethical dilemma arises when there are two equally unwelcome alte rnatives which involves a conflict of moral principle and it is not clear which choice is right Banks (2006). When social workers struggle to buy the farm a decision they bed be then guided by the code of ethics. The primary objective of the Associations code of Ethics is to express the values and principles which are integral to social work, and to give guidance on ethical practice. BASW (2001). Loewenverg and Dolgoff (1996) state that Ethic are designed to help social worker fall which of the two or more competing goals iscorrect for their given situational . However aboard ethical awareness you have to be aware of the publicly verbalize values of your agency and make skilful judgements based upon your accumulated knowledge and experience. Ethical considerations are rarely the responsibility of one worker yet, agencies policies and structures of accountability offer both guidance and a standard against which your practice buttocks be measured. Accountability, therefore, is the process through which employers and the public put up judge the quality of individual workers practice and hold them responsible for their decisions and actions. (Derek Clifford Beverley Burke 2005)Competing values and multiple-client system are two areas where a social worker may find themselves facing an ethical dilemma. Weather it is the social work values that is competing against agency values or within each a confliction of values, which will gift the social worker in need to decide which value will take priority. Also deciding which role the social worker must take in roll to reach the right decision can lead to the dilemma of role confliction. Beckett and Maynard (2006) suggest that the role of a social worker can be put into three groups Advocacy, Direct counter careen Agent and Executive. The advocacy role can be either level or indirect. Direct change agent being counsellor or therapist, mediator, educator and catalyst, with executive role as almoner, care manag er, responsibility holder, co-ordinator and service developer (Beckett and Maynard 2006 p8).The GSCC (2002) code of conductsays As a social care worker, you must strive to establish and maintain the trust and confidence of service users and carers (s2), which includes Respecting confidential development and clearly explaining agency policies about confidentiality to service users and carers. Consider the succeeding(a) scenario whilst on placement a client disclosed sensitive nurture to a trainee social worker regarding the well-being of her neighbours children. After clarification that social worker would have to pass this in systemation on to their manager, the client did not wish to consent to the information being passed on. When the supporting transactionhip had ended, the social worker had to then make a decision based on where there priorities lay. As they were supporting the client who disclosed, they had a responsibility to proceed the standard of respecting her confide ntiality. However they also had a responsibility to the wider society which in this case was the children who were at risk of harm.When making the decision they assessed all the information and weighed up the outcomes. Do they withhold the information in order to maintain the trust and respect of the client or do they prioritize the inevitably and risk of the children? They then turned to the agency expertguarding policy and the code of ethics for social workers which clearly states we must not promise to keep secrets for or about a child or young person mission safeguarding policy, (2010) p10 and further states We aim to safeguard children at all times, by delivering our services safely and by sharing information when there is a concern.p9. clearly the value of life outweighed the needs and wishes of the client in this circumstance. However to whom did the social worker owe responsibility and which role should they take in this situation. Banks (2006) p48 clarifies this conflic t by suggesting Yet while the social worker may be able to focus largely on one individual service user and take on the role of advocate for the service users rights, often the social worker has to take into account the rights of significant others in a situation. In the interests of justice it may not always be morally right to promote the service users rights at the expense of those of othersThe social worker if doubting her judgement, would address the BASW (2001) code of Ethics to guide the outcome of her decision, the code states Social workers will not act without informed consent of service users, unless required by law to protect that person or another from risk of earnest harm. (4.1.4 p8) Furthermore it guides us by stating In particular(a) circumstances where the priority of the service users interest is outweighed the need to protect others or by legal requirements, make service users aware that their interests may be overridden. (4.1.1 b p8) As you can see the code o f ethics guided the social worker to the right course of action that they should take. They were duty curb by law to act on behalf of the individuals who were at most risk.According to Parrot (2010) p86 riskiness refers to the likelihood of an event happening which in modern circumstances is seen as undesirable. It is when facing issues involving risk that values become of primal importance in enabling practitioners to manage risk. Consider the following scenario a social worker visits an elderly noblewoman in her home subsequently a referral is made by the ladies niece. The niece is concerned for the safety of her aunt after(prenominal) a recent decline in her aunts mobility and health which get outed in a nasty fall. The niece lives quite far away and cannot provide regular care for her aunt. The lady values her independence and does not want to be put in a residential home which her niece hypothecates would be for the best however there is a concern able risk that if some form of intervention is not in place the lady is at serious risk of hurting herself further. The social worker is faced with a dilemma. The lady has a right to self-sufficiency and self-determination however there is a risk of potential harm happening. The social worker must risk assess the potential outcomes and measure the risk involved. Which on one devote the individual faces residential care involving losing much personal freedom and autonomy on the other hand to leave a person in their own home to face social isolation and to be potentially at risk of physical danger may also be unwelcome. Social workers have to look to the consequences of their actions and weight up which action would be least harmful / most beneficial to the user, and which action would benefit most efficiently Parrott (2010) p51 While Kemshall (2002) p128 argues, risk management cannot guarantee to prevent risk. It can attempt to limit the chances of risky situations tuning into dangerous ones or down t he consequences of such situations. As she suggests, minimization rather than reduction is the key.In other words to glide path this situation the social worker will separate the social work values that is embedded in the their practice which is As a social care worker, you must respect the rights of the service users while seeking to ensure that their behaviour does not harm themselves or other people. (GSCC 2002 s4). For further guidance the social worker will give away with the code of ethics which states we may limit clients rights to self-determination when, in the social workers professional judgment, clients actions or potential actions pose a serious, foreseeable, and imminent risk to themselves or others, but it also tells us that we are to promote clientsself-determination Code of Ethics (1.02). Weighing up the outcomes of the individual the social worker will be committed to allowing the individual choice and empowerment. And work with the elderly lady to ensure her se lf-determination remains able whilst also advocating on the ladies behalf to ensure she is able to access services which will allow her to live a safe independent life. Thompson (2005,p170) cited on blackboard says it is the social workers role to enable service users and carers to gain power and control over their own lives and circumstances..to help people to have a voice..so that they counter the negative do of discrimination and marginalization whilst Hatton (2008, p145) cited on( track PowerPoint 2011) sees social workers role as active change agents to create an empowered and active group of service users and carers who hold us to account, share in our decision making and participate actively in the way we deliver servicesSocial work decisions span a wide range from safeguarding through to allocation services and advising clients and families on courses of action to improve their lives. As we can see some decisions may involve a breach of confidentiality and assessment of h igh risks such as a vulnerable adult in need of services to improve their quality of life and prevent harm even death. It is important therefore for social workers to be able to justify their actions. Social worker therefore must draw upon a variety of professional knowledge such as law, policy, research, theory, standards, principles and practice wisdom to inform complex and sensitive judgements and decisions in suspicious situations where harm may ensue. Much of what social workers do concerns decisions about future day courses of action, which puts decision making at the heart of social work as a core professional activity. Banks (2006) p9This assignment will now examine how the ethical dilemma can be resolvedby discussingan approach to guide the process of ethical decisions in practice. We have identified that social workers are expected to critically examine ethical issues in order to come to a resolution that is consistent with social work values and ethical principles. Ho wever how is the social worker able to organize all the components relevant to the decision and outcomes. one and only(a) example of a model to help assist the social worker reach resolution is Mattison (2000, p.206) His model offers a framework to analyse ethical dilemmas such as Define and join information Once the social worker has identified an ethical dilemma, they begin the process of making a decision by fully exploring case details and gathers needed information to understand holistically the clients current circumstances. Supporting this is Horner (2005 p97) who says that social workers are to engage holistically with both the person and their circumstances whilst at the uniform time recognizing the processes of power dynamics at the play in the dower relationshipIt is then important for the social worker to distinguish the practice aspects of the case from the ethical considerations (so separate practice from how you have learned to think about ethical issues). Identif y value tensions The social worker must refer to the professional code of ethics to help clarify obligations and identify the principles that have a bearing on the dilemma The social worker projects, weighs, and measures the possible courses of action that seem reasonable and the potential consequences of these The social worker after weighing up options must select an action for solution a dilemma. This involves determining which of the competing obligations are we going to honour foremost (this may mean at the expense of others). The social worker reaches the resolution symbolise and this means being able to justify the decision.To further this ideas of influence on decisions It is also vitally important for social workers to take time to reflect on their practice and own values. This is a vital point because although guides and frameworks can be developed to offer social workers a logical approach to the decision making process, to some extent, the use of discretionary judgmen ts is evitable (Mattison, 2000). The value system and preferences of the decision maker ultimately shape the process of working through dilemmas and so it is important for social workers to be ethically aware of their character, philosophies, attitudes and biases. Furthermore, philosophers have argued that elements of deontological and teleological thinking operate in and influences decision making in ethical dilemmas. A deontological thinker is grounded in the belief that actions can be determined right or wrong, good or bad, heedless of the consequences they produce and so adherence to rules is central. Once formulated, ethical rules should hold under all circumstances (Mattison, 2000). On the other hand a teleological thinker is ground in the belief of consequences and so weighing up the potential consequences of proposed actions is central to this way of thinking (Mattison, 2000). So a social worker following a deontological way of thinking will differ in their approach to ethi cal decision making compared with a social worker following a teleological way of thinking.As part of the profession social workers often find them self-working collaboratively with other professionals such as doctors, police, nurses, teachers and probation officers to name but a few. Considering the variety of different professions merging to reach possible outcomes it is not surprising that partnership working becomes a complex problem. Mainly because of the assumptions that we are all working towards a collective aim. Bates cited in Parrot (2010.) Different values, ideologies, ethics and culture of working can similarly lead to confliction of interests. Effective partnerships require sustained relationships, shared agendas built up over time and a consignment to shared problem solving. When different professional groupings come together in collaboration then they grow with them their own ways of working, organisational cultures and attitudes, their particular practice experien ce and their own ethical codes Parrot (2010)Consider the following scenario a social work bookman commitment to anti oppressive practice is clearly challenged whilst on placement. The unpaid worker organisation which they are placed with worked in partnership with the crown court. One day as they were waiting for an expected family, to whom they were supporting, they are then approached by an usher (a worker of the court justice system). He commented on the family banteringly sayingOh no not that family again they are low life Jeremy Kyle watching scroungers, they bring the trouble on themselves. This use of stereotypical delivery discriminated and negatively challenged the whole purpose of the organisations aims which is to value diversity, whilst also conflicting with subdivision 5 of the core values of the GSCC You must not discriminate unlawfully or unjustifiably against service users, carers or colleagues (GSCC 2002 5.5) Parrot (2010 ) suggests There is no appropriate way at which a social worker can condone such language weather they choose to confront the issue at hand or make a formal complaint. Parrott (2010) further states what is the point in partnership working with fellow professionals only to result in the dilution of the social workers value base and the demeaning of service users. The point of partnership working is not to deliver appropriate services to service users only to have them undermined by some partners exhibiting jaundiced attitudes.What if in the scenario discussed above, the discriminatory attitudes and beliefs of the usher, was an unconscious influence to the social workers approach when working with the individuals involved in the scenario. This could result in an already marginalised group becoming oppressed further. Thompson, (2005 p34) describes subjection as Inhuman or degrading treatment of individuals or groups in hardship and in justice brought about by the dominance of one group over another the negative and demeanin g exercise of power. conquest often involves disregarding the rights of an individual or group and this is a self-control of citizenship.Thompson further suggests that conquering can act at three levels, these levels of oppression offers a framework for looking at how inequalities and discrimination manifest themselves. ain level which relates to an individuals thoughts, feelings, attitudes and actions. Cultural level which looks at shared ways of seeing, thinking, and doing. structural level relates to matters such as policy. Thompson (2005 p21 -23) Abramson 1996 cited in Mattison (2000) supports this by saying The process of the decision making is forged by the prejudice and prejudgement brought to the decision making process by the decision maker. Therefore social workers as agents of change attempt to alleviate inequalities and oppression within societies and need to be aware of the values underlying their work by referring to the code of ethics. By adopting values and anti -oppressive practice such as advocacy social workers will be able to make informed decisions in addressing aspects, which relate to the preparation of services to individuals who may have differing needs. Parrott (2010 p23) describes Anti oppressive practice (AOP)as a general value orientation towards countering oppression experienced by service users on such grounds as race, gender class age etc. AOP are also values of working in partnership and empowerment.Social workers and their employers have an ethical duty to ensure that the organisations they work for operate in a just manner Parrot (2010) Social work organisations therefore must uphold the portrayal that social work is something worthy and the operation of its organisation will lead to positive outcomes. The commitment to social justice ensures public organisations work under legislation to quench unlawful discrimination and to promote equality of opportunity and good relations between persons of different racial groups. E xpectations of the social care employee are prompted by the GCSS code of conduct. For example in the case scenario discussed above if the attitudes of the usher was another social worker within an organization the social worker would act on guidance on policy procedure and ensure the commitment to social justice was withheld. If the other social workers attitudes towards service users resulted in dirty treatment and inequality of services than they are not upholding the ethical principles of effective practice stated in the IFSW (1994) Social workers should recognise and respect the heathen and cultural diversity of the societies in which they practise, taking account of individual, family, group and fellowship differences. S4.2.2 Therefore the other social worker would have a responsibility to Challenging unjust practices Social workers have a duty to bring to the trouble of their employers, policy makers, politicians and the general public situations where resources are inadeq uate or where distribution of resources, policies and practices are oppressive, unfair or harmful.s4.2.1If the other social worker is ethically aware and challenges injustice it is their moral obligation to bring to the attention of the organisation the other social workers behaviour. The social worker would participate in whistle blowing Parrot (2010) p154 defines whistle blowing as The disclosure by an employee, in a government agency or private enterprise, to the public or to those in authority, of mismanagement, corruption, illegality or some other wrongdoing. The organisation will then deal directly with the moral character of the social workers discriminatory attitudes.In conclusion social work can be a challenging subject and one that will actively push the boundaries of all social workers on a personal level and professional level. It is agreed within social work that ethics, morals and values are all an unavoidable part of professional practice and Ethical awareness is a requisite part of practice of any social work (IFSW, 1994). However as this assignment has discussed guides can be provided but inevitability it is up to the social workers discretionary judgement of the circumstances. Arguably It is therefore important as a social worker to be aware of the code of ethics, and to talk, discuss, debrief and struggle with colleagues and supervisors about dilemmas they may be struggling with. Finally, the onus is on social workers to be reflective about themselves and how self influences practice and decision making. To finish we have to be critically aware of personal beliefs and biases, bringing them to fire up so they do not unconsciously influence our practice decisions, prima(p) to injustice and unfair distribution and access to services. Service users must be put at the heart of social work practice and it is our duty as social workers to take any necessary steps within our organisations to ensure mistreatment and inequality is brought to surf ace. We can therefore improve public trust within the social service profession and encourage service users to work in partnership to empower their lives.ReferencesAgency Safe guarding Policy, (2010)Banks, S., (2006). Ethics and set in Social Work .3rd Ed. Basingstoke Palgrave Macmillan,BASW (2001) The Code of Ethics for Social Work,Beckett, C. Maynard, A.,( 2005). Values and Ethics in Social Work An Introduction, London SageBiestek,F. (1971). The Casework Relationship, seventh Ed Unwin University Books.Clark, C. (2000) Social Work Ethics Politics, Principles and Practice. Basingstoke MacMillanClass PowerPoint, Values and Ethics, chalkboard (2011)Clifford, D Burke, B, Anti-oppressive Ethics, Social Work Education, Vol. 24, No. 6, September (2005), pp. 677-692GSCC (2002) Codes of Practice for Social Care Workers and Employers, London GSCCHorner, N. (2005) What is Social Work? Context and Perspectives. Exeter Learning Matters world-wide Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) availabl e at http//www.ifsw.org/p38000324.html, accessed on 12/05/2011Kemshall, H and Pritchard, J (1996) Good Practice in Risk Assessment and Risk Management. London Jessica Kingsley PublishersLoewenberg, F. and Dolgoff, R. (1996) Ethical Choices in the Helping Professions. Ethical Decisions for Social Work Practice, 5th ed., Illinois Peacock PublishersMattison, M. (2000) Ethical Decision Making The Person in the Process Social Work Vol.45(3), pp.201-212.Parrott, L, (2010) Values and ethics in social work practice 2nd ed, learning matters ExeterPinker, R. (1990) Social Work in an Enterprise Society, London Routledge.Thompson, N, (2005). Understanding Social Work Preparing for Practice. 2nd Ed. Basingstoke Palgrave Macmillan.