Social Work: Ethics and Values - Essay Example

Social Work (Values and Ethics) May 8, Introduction Social work entails implementation of standards. The standards include compulsory work values. The standards include work ethics. The standards focus on HCPC standards. The standards include both performance and proficiency standards. Lola must prioritize implementing service user-friendly social work standards. Explanation of how a professional worker, I, can resolve the Rajiv-Lola issues and dilemmas using ethical perspectives. As a social worker, I would counsel Lola to change her ways. Lola must not inject her personal issues into her social work responsibilities. Doing so would significantly reduce the social worker’s quality work output. The case shows that both Rajiv and Lola cried. The crying is a symptom that an unfavourable situation cropped up. Rajiv disliked being rushed. Similarly, Lola disliked waiting excessively for Rajiv to finish his food. Absolutism. Lola must implement absolutism ethics (Royakkers, 2011). Absolutism states that there are absolute ethical or morality standards. People must obey the ethical or moral standards, without exception. There are no excuses or exemptions in the compulsory implementation of the moral standards or ethics standards. In the current case, Lola should not rush Rajiv’s eating. Lola’s personal issues or problems should not affect or reduce the social workers’ required minimum social work performance. Lola should be penalized in order to prevent a repeat of her unethical behavior. Surely, absolutism ethics dictates Lola must wait until Rajiv finishes his meal. Relativism. Lola must implement relativism ethics (Hales, 2011). The concept focuses on the individuals forming his or her diversely unique ethical standards. Other individuals influence how a person’s ethical standards are formed. Other societies can affect how a person’s ethical preferences are crafted. Consequently, one person’s relativism ethics may differ from another person’s relativism ethics. One’s cultural upbringing influences the person’s relativism ethics preferences. For example, people in the United States insist that it is morally right to eat beef. On the other hand, people in India insist that eating beef is immoral. Lola’s forcing Rajiv to uncomfortably rush his eating is not Lola’s workplace’s work ethic. Obviously, Lola must incorporate the social work community’s relativism ethics, imitating the other social workers’ making life for the patients more comfortable. Deontology. Lola must implement deontology ethics (Tannsjo, 2013). Deontology ethics focuses on duty. It is the duty of every person to obey all ethics standards. There is no exception to the strict implementation of the ethical standard. For example, the father must not retrieve his one year old child from park grass in compliance with the park’s rule: do not step on the grass. The father cannot state that his child’s life is more important than the park’s keeping off the grass policy. Unmistakably, Lola must implement the accepted workplace ethic to wait for Rajiv to finish his food. Consequentialism ethics. Lola must implement the essence of consequentialism ethics (Ilea, 2013). The ethics concept focuses on the outcome of the act or non-act as the determining factor. In the above example, the father should violate the park’s do not step on the grass policy. Violating the park policy should be allowed. In the above case, the father’s act of trespassing into the grass is an exemption to the park’s general rules. The father can be allowed to step on the grass in order to retrieve his straying child. The park management must understand the father’s predicament. Lola’s forcing Rajiv to finish his food triggered an uncomfortable situation on Rajiv. Lola’s forceful instructions gave an impression that Lola is angry at Rajiv. Patients, especially Rajiv, are not happy in any anger-laden situation. Clearly, Lola must not force Rajiv to rush his normal eating speed in order to avoid Rajiv’s “crying” response. Virtue ethics. Lola must implement the value ethics (Athanassoulis, 2013). The concept focuses on the importance of virtue or morality of the person. For example, people must give alms to the beggar. The people should not humiliate the beggar for not finding work in order to fill the beggar’s empty stomach. The people should not reprimand the beggar for lazily asking for the peoples donations. All individuals must be honest in all his or her dealings with other individuals or entities. For example, the customer must return the excess change mistakenly given by the store cashier. Lola must not make Rajiv angry. Certainly, Lola should not rush Rajiv’s eating in order not to anger Rajiv. Voluntarism ethics. Lola must implement the voluntarism ethics (Dowler, 2011). The concept focuses on how the individual was willing to perform an action or avoid an action. Willing equates to freedom. The individual is not forced to do an action or forced to avoid an action. For example, the individual freely gives alms to the street urchin. The 15 year old child freely helps a 70 year old person cross the busy crowded street. Lola should donate more of her precious eating job to make Rajiv’s eating more pleasant. Lola should allow Rajiv the time extension to finish his eating. Doing so will make Rajiv happy. Doing so will prevent Lola’s feeling sorry for her unwarranted social work act. Explanation on how the professional social worker, I, can resolve the current Rajiv-Lola social work issues and dilemmas using social work values Lola must implement our United Kingdom’s social work standards of conduct, ethics, as well as performance (Reamer, 2013). First, Lola must prioritize the best interest of the service users. Rajiv prefers to eat slowly. Consequently, Lola must adhere to Rajiv’s preference for slow eating. Lola should allocate more time for Rajiv to finish his eating. Doing show will create an impression that Lola respects Rajiv’s right to eat at a slow pace (Parrott, 2010). Lola must avoid rushing Rajiv for the rushing may precipitate to safety, wellbeing, or health of Rajiv. An angry Rajiv may break things, destroy or harm other employees, including Lola. Rajiv’s anger may trigger a heart attack or other debilitating health issues. Lola must prioritize the protection of the service users, especially Rajiv (Dickens, 2012). Second, Lola must implement high person conduct standards. Lola must present an image of professionalism. Professionalism includes implementing customer-friendly acts. Lola’s rushing Rajiv to eat faster creates an unfavorable image of Lola. Consequently, Rajiv may recent or dislike being near Lola. Consequently, Rajiv may try to avoid future contacts with Lola. Rajiv’s crying indicates he does not like Lola’s act o forcing Rajiv to drastically change his slow eating preference to a faster eating mode. Third, Lola must continually update her professional and skills levels. Lola should continue undergoing seminars and other researcher to improve her current social work responsibilities. Lola must research on how to calm her nerves down in order not to irritate or anger the service users, especially Rajiv. Lola must study conduct further research on how to prevent personal issues or problems, including her cancer worries, from avoidably intruding into her social work responsibilities. Fourth, Lola must act within the limits of her knowledge, experience, or skills. Lola must confide with her superiors on how to control her short temper. Lola must seek counseling on how to prevent personal issues from implementing the compulsory social work standards. Lola should seek intervention on how to continue prioritizing the care of the patients, as required by social work performance standards. Fifth, Lola must comply with our United Kingdom’s social standards of proficiency. First, Lola should practice safety and effectively within her practice. Consequently, forcing Rajiv to eat faster may trigger safety issues. An unhappy Rajiv may do unwarranted acts. Such acts may endanger the lives of other service users. A forced Rajiv may harm the social workers, especially Lola. Additionally, Rajiv may damage social work facilities to bring out his frustration over Lola’s unexpected poor quality service. Sixth, Lola must work within the legal and ethical limits of her occupation. Lola must ensure she keeps all ethical and moral standards. Lola must not violate any laws by infringing on the right of Rajiv to enjoy a hearty meal. Lola must not violate the social work facilities’ user-based practice. Seventh, Lola must retain practice fitness. Lola currently feels that she is not physically fit to continue working as a social worker. Being worried about her cancer issues, Lola should take a leave of absence. Since Lola’s mind is on her cancer, Lola must ensure that she is fit to continue serving the needs of the service users, especially Rajiv. Lola’s cancer issues show that she is not feeling physically well. Consequently, she is waiting for the medical report to confirm her fears that her painful discomfort is due to cancer. Eighth, Lola must continue practicing professional judgment. Lola’s rushing Rajiv to eat faster does not quality as quality and effective professional judgment. Rajiv’s crying over Lola’s unwarranted act evidences Lola’s unprofessional judgment. Lola’s crying after seeing Rajiv show his dismay over Lola’s act indicates Lola did not implement user-based professional judgment. Ninth, Lola must practice equality, diversity and culture in her practice. Lola’s forcing Rajiv to eat faster shows she does not treat Rajiv, a service user, as an equal. Lola’s rushing Rajiv to eat faster indicates she does not respect the social work facility’s prevailing user-friendly culture. Lastly, Lola did not implement diversity in the workplace. Lola must learn to adapt to each diverse service user’s situation. Lola’s main purpose is to serve. To serve means to fill the needs of each diverse service user. Rajiv needs to eat slower. Consequently, Lola must fill Rajiv’s need to eat slower. Lastly, Lola must be aware of impact of her cancer-triggered unwarranted behavior on the service users. Awareness equates to ensuring all her acts will not create discomfort on the service users, including Rajiv’s desire to slowly eat his food morsels. Lastly, Lola must not violate Rajiv’s freedom to eat slowly. The article 5 of our United Kingdom human rights statute states that everyone has the right to freedom. Rajiv has the right to eat slower than the other service users. Lola’s forcing Rajiv to eat faster is a violation of Rajiv’s right to enjoy a hearty meal at his own slow pace. Lola must implement the provisions of the British Association of Social Workers’ code of ethics (Dimond, 2011). The code of ethics indicates the social worker should promote problem solving in human relationships. The provisions require social workers to ensure and not prevent the service users’ exercise of their human rights, including Rajiv’s right to eat in a slow manner. Surely, forcing Rajiv to eat faster does not contribute to Rajiv’s wellbeing. Instead, rushing Rajiv to eat faster creates an impression that Rajiv is a violator of company policy. Further, Lola must uphold the British Association of Social Workers’ code of ethics provision indicating that social workers must uphold and promote human dignity (Dimond, 2011). The same code of ethics mandates that the social worker should enhance the service users’ wellbeing (Dickens, 2012). Rushing Rajiv to eat faster does not uphold service user Rajiv’s right to eat slowly. Forcing Rajiv to eat faster indicates Lola violates the code of ethics’ human dignity principle. Lola creates an unwarranted image that Rajiv is being treated like an animal of a person of lower, discriminated, stature. Lola cannot force her preferences on the service users. Lola must implement the code of ethics’ service user participation provision (Ireland, 2012). Lola should seek the service users’ suggestions, complaints, and other inputs in the implementation of the social work facility’s performance and proficiency standards (Stuart, 2013). Lola must seek Rajiv’s comment on the possible extension of eating time. Rajiv will gladly offer his free suggestions to Lola. One of Rajiv’s possible recommendations is to allow the service users a longer time period to finish their meals. An extension of 30 minutes eating time will not reduce Lola’s compliance with her other social work responsibilities. Explanation of how the Social Worker, I, can resolve the current Rajiv-Lola issues and dilemmas As a social worker, I will advice Lola to appease Rajiv. I will immediately confront Lola to settle the issue with Rajiv. I will persuade Lola to seek Rajiv’s forgiveness. Lola can explain that Rajiv can return to the table to continue eating. Lola must explain to Rajiv that Rajiv take as long as he wants to finish his meal. Lola must escort Rajiv to the food counter to get more food. Lola’s change of act will appease Rajiv’s anger (Jones, 2014). I will have a one on one talk with Lola. I will use my persuasive powers to explain to Lola that her main responsibility is to fill the needs of the service users (Bruce, 2013). My persuasion will include explaining to Lola that she must take a leave of absence. The leave of absence will allow Lola to focus on her cancer issues. Lola can immediately visit the medical doctor. Her doctor visit will confirm or negate her cancer fears. I will persuade Lola to undergo remedial social work seminars (Bruce, 2013). The seminars will impress on Lola her sworn duty to fill the needs of the service users. The seminars will update Lola on the proper implementation of the social work standards of performance. The required seminars will convince Lola to prioritise proficiency in all her service user dealings. The seminars will inspire Lola to comply with the required ethics standards during her social wok tour of duty. I can persuade Lola to implement Sarah Banks’ social work concepts (Banks, 2012). Sarah Banks emphasized the importance of service user inputs to improving the social work service performance and efficiency (Banks, 2012). The service users’ inputs will contribute to the better delivery of the social workers’ filling the diverse needs of the different social workers. Rajiv may explain to Lola that he has stomach or eating problems that hinder Rajiv’s eating normally. Rajiv’s explanation will convince Lola allow Rajiv more time to consume his remaining meal portions. Not including the service users’ inputs, including Rajiv’s preference for a longer eating time, would defeat the social worker Lola’s oath to fill all the needs of the service users. I can persuade Lola to implement Richard Hugman’s social work concepts. Further, Richard Hugman insists that culture and diversity influences the implementation of social work practices (Hugman, 2013). Lola must bow down to Rajiv’s insistence to prolong his eating activity. Hugman insists that social workers must prioritise caring for the service users, including caring for Rajiv’s preference for longer eating time. Forcing Rajiv to eat faster equates to not caring for Rajiv’s eating preference. Human also insists that social workers must respect the service users’ human rights as well as social justice rights. Lola cannot force Rajiv to finish his meal, violating Rajiv’s eating preference right. Instead, Lola should persuade Hugman in a tactful, caring, open, and competent manner to finish his meal within the social work facility’s prescribed eating time. Explaining that Rajiv’s faster eating will help Lola ensure better meal service will create an approving smile on Rajiv’s face. Lola must use persuasion to explain to Rajiv the reasons for her insistence to hurry Rajiv’s eating. Consequently, Rajiv will enthusiastically reduce this eating tiime. Conclusion Social work requires setting into motion of social standards. The social workers must implement social work values and ethics. The social workers should set into motion the BASW provisions, HCPC standards of performance and HCPC standards of proficiency. Evidently, the social workers, especially Lola, should prioritise executing service user-friendly social work standards. References: Athanassoulis, N., 2013. Virtue Ethics. London: A& C Black Press. Banks, S., 2012. Ethics and Values in Social Work. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Bruce, L., 2013. Reflective Practice for Social Workers. London: McGraw-Hill Press. Dickens, J., 2012. Socia Work, Law and Ethics. London: Routledge Press. Dimond, B., 2011. Legal Aspects of Occupational Therapy. London: J. Wiley & Sons. Dowler, E., 2011. Theological Ethics. London: Hymns Press. Hales, S., 2011. A Companion to Relativism. London: J. Wiley & Sons. Hugman, R., 2013. Culture, Values and Ethics in Social Work: Embracing Diversity. London: Routledge Press. Ilea, R., 2013. Consequentialism and Environmental Ethics. London: Routledge Press. Ireland, C.,2012. Conflict and Crisis Communication. London: Routledge Press. Jones, K., 2014. Surviving Your Social Work Placement. London: Palgrave Macmillan . Parrott, L., 2010. Values and Ethics in Social Work Practice. London: Sage Press. Reamer, F., 2013. Social Work Values and Ethics. London: University Press. Royakkers, L., 2011. Ethics, Technology, and Engineering. London: J. Wiley & Sons. Stuart, C., 2013. Mentoring, Learning and Assessment in Clincial Practice. London: Elsevier Press. Tannsjo, T., 2013. Understanding Ethics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Read More