iii. Accountability to colleagues. iv. Responsibilities in the administrative centre; this includes providing services and management of social workers. v. Responsibilities in certain environments; for instance educational, instruction, direction and assessment. As well as research and private practice. vi. Last but not least, responsibility to the profession. This code of ethics is based upon five values that are the foundation of social work. They include the fact that all human beings have the right to dignity and self-worth; social justice which includes provision of basic necessities, equable dissemination of resources, as well as access to the same, human rights and equitable access to law and justice as well as to social development.
There should be a desire to be of service to others and assist them to access their needs; innate integrity of the social worker; and ability to competently carry out their duties Mattison (2000). Critical Analysis of Different Ethical Perspectives in Social Work There is a tension in social work between the individual and society as relates to the fostering of individual welfare vs. social justice. Since the balance between these two concepts is not always stable, and the independence of social work is restricted, then social workers must build up an ability to take up moral positions and defend them as they go about their daily duties.
Research which seeks to understand the role that ethics plays in social work augments the ability to find common ground. These studies also outline the related aspects impinging on the moral judgement of social workers hence enables the validation of their work Giannou (2009). The decisions that social workers come to, often have legal implications, in addition to which, they could be required to make ethical choices. This involves issues of right vs. wrong, duty vs. obligation. They involve coming to a conclusion regarding the core values espoused by the profession, practical application of current principles of ethics, and establishing common ground when duties and obligations clash.
Congress (1998), Linzer (1999), Loewenberg et.al (2000), Reamer, (1999). Although there is general agreement on the content of social workers’ core values, there may be divergence in the views of how these should be applied especially where there are legal implications. One view is that pursuit of social justice and extermination of injustice must be done within the parameters of existing legislation, while seeking amendment or addition to those laws where necessary. The opposing view holds that civil disobedience and occasional circumvention of current laws may be justified depending on the circumstances.
These ethical dilemmas occur in every scenario including direct practice i.e. service delivery to clients, organisation of community, administration, policy and research. The significance of ethical decision-making has been acknowledged especially since the 1980s. Structures for assisting the practitioner make these decisions are widely available in literature, including Congress (1998), Linzer (1999), Loewenberg et.al. (2000) and Reamer (1993 & 1999). These structures are typically guidelines to the application of values, standards and theories in ethics.
The major normative theories are founded upon archetypal standpoints in moral philosophy Rachels (1993) and are generally divided into deontological and teleological (or consequentialist) theories. The former is derived from the Greek word, deontos which means “of the obligatory” and has as its philosophy the view that actions are intrinsically correct or immoral, good or bad – not taking into account whatever consequences they may bring about. In the deontological point of view, personified by Immanuel Kant, an 18th century German philosopher, social workers must always obey the law without exception or question.
The ends in no way justify the means in this philosophy, especially if it involves breaking the law, a rule or violation of rights Rachels (1993).
Read More