National Association of Social Workers (NASW) code of ethics

at
Categories
Tags

 

 

For the position papers, students will be given a case study, and will respond to the questions that follow the case. When responding to the questions, students are expected to:

refer to course materials (could be the textbook or a relevant, assigned article),
use the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) code of ethics,
use scholarly journal articles beyond our course materials to back up statements made within the paper.
use APA format for this assignment. There is an APA resource link located on the class blackboard site. Students unfamiliar with APA format are strongly encouraged to make an appointment at the Writing Center to review APA format expectations prior to submitting the paper.
The body of the paper should be 3 pages with a maximum of 5 pages. Papers should also include a title page and the reference page, per APA format. The title and reference pages do not count towards the page length requirements for the body of the paper. Students are required to follow APA format for this assignment, double space, and utilize Times New Roman 12 point font. Papers should utilize proper grammar and should flow smoothly. Introductory paragraphs and concluding paragraphs are expected. Headings are encouraged.

 

Antonio is a 25 year old client who has been receiving counseling support for the past 6 months for anxiety. He has been making very good progress and has been feeling positive about the support and guidance he has been receiving from his counselor, Mr. Marcus Rodriguez, who is a licensed social worker. In a recent appointment, Antonio disclosed to Mr. Rodriguez that his wife is pregnant. Antonio explains that his wife is in graduate school and that he is the only financial contributor to the relationship. He shares that he and his wife are concerned about the financial strain that a baby will put on their finances at this time and the impact a child will have on his wife’s ability to complete her graduate training. He also shares that they have made an appointment to access an abortion next month. At the end of the appointment, Mr. Rodriguez commends Antonio for making good progress on his goals for coping with his anxiety. Mr. Rodriguez goes on to explain that he is devoted to his religious practice and because his religion objects to abortion he is no longer able to provide counseling to Antonio. As the session ends Antonio is upset and asks if there is anything that they can do to continue with the counseling. Mr. Rodriguez is firm and says that there is nothing he can do because of this conflict in values and wishes Antonio good luck as he escorts him out of the office.

Prompt: Mr. Rodriguez’s supervisor becomes aware of this situation and believes that Mr. Rodriguez’s actions are unethical. Explain this position and use evidence from the code of ethics to support this claim. Then, offer a solution that would be ethical and can be supported by different evidence from the code of ethics
Use the NASW Code of Ethics, course materials, and at least one scholarly article from outside our course materials to support your paper.
Don’t forget this is a position paper and not an opinion paper. Do not use “I” statements and back up statements with sources, otherwise statements are just opinion. Excellent papers will use a variety of sources – course materials, evidence from the code of ethics, and several scholarly articles or books that are not part of the course materials. If you have questions about scholarly sources

Sample Solution

Mr. Rodriguez’s supervisor believes his actions are unethical given the context of this situation and evidence from the NASW Code of Ethics (2008). Specifically, Mr. Rodriguez violated section 2.05 which states that “social workers should provide services and represent themselves as social workers consistent with the profession’s mission and core values” (NASW 2008). In this case, Mr. Rodriguez failed to provide support to Antonio in accordance with his professional obligations as a social worker by abruptly ending their session due to personal objections about abortion based on his religious beliefs. Furthermore, he demonstrated a lack of cultural humility by not recognizing or making any effort to understand Antonio’s different position or beliefs about abortion (Kurz et al., 2016).

Additionally, section 2.01 of the Code requires that “social workers should practice within their areas of competence and develop and enhance their professional knowledge and skills throughout their careers” (NASW 2008). Here it is clear that Mr. Rodriguez acted outside his area of expertise when attempting to impose his own ideological views at the expense of providing adequate care for Antonio’s mental health needs (Hoffman & Yoder 2013). This disregard for established ethical standards suggests an incompetent use of power dynamics while simultaneously infringing upon Antonio’s right to choose how he wishes to proceed regarding his wife pregnancy.

Given these violations, there is certainly reason for concern over Mr. Rodriguez’ ethics in this situation . An ethical alternative could have been for him to refer Antonio to another provider who could better meet client needs without bias . Further training on cultural humility also suggested help ensure counselors recognize value different perspectives maintain respectful working relationships clients across all backgrounds.

First, it is never just to intentionally kill innocent people in wars, supported by Vittola’s first proposition. This is widely accepted as ‘all people have a right not to be killed’ and if a soldier does, they have violated that right and lost their right. This is further supported by “non-combatant immunity” (Frowe (2011), Page 151), which leads to the question of combatant qualification mentioned later in the essay. This is corroborated by the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, ending the Second World War, where millions were intently killed, just to secure the aim of war. However, sometimes civilians are accidentally killed through wars to achieve their goal of peace and security. This is supported by Vittola, who implies proportionality again to justify action: ‘care must be taken where evil doesn’t outweigh the possible benefits (Begby et al (2006b), Page 325).’ This is further supported by Frowe who explains it is lawful to unintentionally kill, whenever the combatant has full knowledge of his actions and seeks to complete his aim, but it would come at a cost. However, this does not hide the fact the unintended still killed innocent people, showing immorality in their actions. Thus, it depends again on proportionality as Thomson argues (Frowe (2011), Page 141).
This leads to question of what qualifies to be a combatant, and whether it is lawful to kill each other as combatants. Combatants are people who are involved directly or indirectly with the war and it is lawful to kill ‘to shelter the innocent from harm…punish evildoers (Begby et al (2006b), Page 290).However, as mentioned above civilian cannot be harmed, showing combatants as the only legitimate targets, another condition of jus in bello, as ‘we may not use the sword against those who have not harmed us (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314).’ In addition, Frowe suggested combatants must be identified as combatants, to avoid the presence of guerrilla warfare which can end up in a higher death count, for example, the Vietnam War. Moreover, he argued they must be part of the army, bear arms and apply to the rules of jus in bello. (Frowe (2011), Page 101-3). This suggests Frowe seeks a fair, just war between two participants avoiding non-combatant deaths, but wouldn’t this lead to higher death rate for combatants, as both sides have relatively equal chance to win since both use similar tactics? Nevertheless, arguably Frowe will argue that combatant can lawfully kill each other, showing this is just, which is also supported by Vittola, who states: ‘it is lawful to draw the sword and use it against malefactors (Begby et al (2006b), Page 309).’
In addition, Vittola expresses the extent of military tactics used, but never reaches a conclusion whether it’s lawful or not to proceed these actions, as he constantly found a middle ground, where it can be lawful to do such things but never always (Begby et al (2006b), Page 326-31). This is supported by Frowe, who measures the legitimate tactics according to proportionality and military necessity. It depends on the magnitude of how much damage done to one another, in order to judge the actions after a war. For example, one cannot simply nuke the terrorist groups throughout the middle-east, because it is not only proportional, it will damage the whole population, an unintended consequence. More importantly, the soldiers must

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.
Hi, how can I help?