The Values And Ethics Of The Profession Social Work Essay

The Values And Ethics Of The Profession tender Work EssaySocial plowers are put into difficult situations on a regular basis. The Health and caveat professions council (HCPC) set guidelines to aid the challenges fond actors face. To remain registered, a friendly histrion of necessity to abide by the HCPC code of morals to secure delivery of the trump out possible religious do for exploiters. Working within the guidelines set can be challenging as it may pillow slip fight with the serve drug substance ab exploiters value or likelyly the affectionate locomoteers experience set. For the purpose of this essay, morality give be delineate as professional obligations and rules of conduct (Meacham, 2007). Social work values impart be defined as a range of beliefs about what is regarded as worthy or valuable in a amicable work context (BASW, 2012 p17). This essay focuses on two areas of the personalisation agenda that can cause challenges for social proletarians accommodation and personal ciphers. The target gain exploiter host for the purposes of this essay is bulk with disabilities. Using the definition stated in the compare practise, (2010) A person is considered disabled if they have a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long-term disallow force play on their ability to do normal daily activities. Legislation and requirements to reenforcement adults with disabilities is increasing for the over eleven million mickle with a restrict long term illness, impairment or disability in salient Britain (office for disability issues, 2012). However, disabled tribe report mixed faces and reactions to the mandates and rules put in place regarding their care and allowances (Dalley, 1991). The social philosophical approaches to social work will be used to deal with the challenges and encounters social workers face. This essay touches upon Kants deontology Benthams and Mills utilitarianism and Biesteks 7 principles approach.Immanuel Kant (1785) developed the speculation of deontology. This means that social workers destiny to be promoting undecomposed actions and the correct motive, even so the consequence is non important and the idea of an pleasant motive is subject to judgement (Adapted by Hartsell, 2006 Banks, 2001 Reiman, 2009 Meacham, 2008). Subsequently, Kant introduced the idea of a vapid positive (CI). A CI maintains a persons motives for their actions and they therefore should be satisfactory as a universal law. Thus people should act on motives that can be used by everyone in a deterrent example baseball club and lead to applaud for people (Darwell, 2002 cited in Reiman, 2009). From this it is seen that people should be case-hardened as an end, for example a choice or desire, kind of than a means (object) to our ingest ends. He believed that everyone should be do byed with respect regardless of their characteristics or behaviour (Banks, 2001).Kant talks about respect for the personistic person and promoting self-importance determination. Biestek (1961) produced 7 principles that over time have render highly influential to social workers looking at values and ethics within their practice. 5 main principles have been usedIndividualisation fruition that each profit user has unique qualities, unafraid and bad.Purposeful mien of feeling Recognition that profit users need to posit their feelings (especially negative ones) freely. credence The social worker should be able to work with a serve user without passing judgement and accepting Individuals for who they are, including their strengths and their weaknesses.Non judgemental attitude Social workers should be able to non pass judgement or assign misdeed to the utility user. It is about judging the service users behaviourUser self determination the social worker should be able to guide the service user, depending on their on their capacity, to have freedom in making their admit las ts and choices (Adapted by Banks, 2001).Utilitarianism focuses on a consequentialist approach as it focuses on the consequences of the action, quite than the actions themselves. (Scheffler, 1994 cited in Reiman, 2009). Decisions should be made on the results and consequences it could have on society rather than on a personal and individualist basis, and to promote ut just about ethical within society. The right action produces the greatest balance of commodity over evil the principle of utility. (Banks, 2001). Utilitarianism is based on a theory developed by Bentham and Mills who looked into two branches of utilitarianism sybaritic and ideal utilitarianism. Bentham explored hedonistic utilitarianism, where healthy was matched with happiness. Mills explored the idea of ideal utilitarianism. This focused on good cosmos about virtues, truth and knowledge, not just happiness. (Banks, 2001). The theory promotes the greatest good for the greatest number of people. When making a d ecision it is imperative that the consequence is considered. Therefore as a social worker, it would be honest to look at the consequences of the forthcoming action and evaluate what would be most beneficial and least harmful to the service user.In the late 1980s, the political relation recognised that an improvement in access to connection serve was required. The government were committed to providing more support for people with long term take by assisting and supporting individuals to manage their conditions and providing services they require in the community rather than in long-stay hospitals.(Oliver, 1996) Morris (1993) conducted a study that looked into disabled individuals who needed sidereal day to day services. He found that disabled individuals were starting to feel a sense of hopelessness and helplessness when trying to access statutory services. Historically, social workers pass judgmented and told service users what services they needed. Through the personalisat ion agenda, and the introduction of direct payments, service users told the social worker their needs. For the first time, the social worker had to accept the service users self-assessment and and then use the assessment to see if the highlighted issues were eligible under Fair price of admission to Care (2003) legislation. Direct payments were introduced in 1997 and social workers had to translate service user needs into a monetary value to enable them to purchase their own service. The aim was to give individuals control over their care and their lives. Direct payments evolved into individualized budgets and have further evolved into a more individualised budget / service plan. The need for change and equality of service render has been recognised as more views are being articulatiod by people with disabilities. In line with Beisteks theory, service users are use purposeful expression of feeling and self-determination to enable the social workers to know their wants and need s. This has resulted in changes which could reduce the potential for conflict in the future.A further challenge is budgetary control. usefulness users often want services that are financially unavailable to them. Although ethics state that service users should be encouraged to have self- determination, be treated as a whole and the social worker should promote and admit information regarding their care (BASW, 2012), the service users choice cannot always be guaranteed. Utilitarianism would counsel that this is because if service users always received the services they wanted, the social worker would not be promoting the greatest good for the greatest number, instead would be pickings a more Kantian approach of promoting moral good. These two philosophical approaches cause conflict within themselves.The Mental subject Act (2005) says a person lacks capacity in relation to a matter if at the material time he is unable to make a decision for himself in relation to the matter becaus e of an impairment of, or a fretfulness in the functioning of, the mind or brain. (s2). This leads to challenges and conflicts for social workers. If the service user had capacity, there could be conflict over the way they spend their budget which could lead to the social worker treating that individual without respect. Following the BASW code of ethics (2012), it states that social workers should respect the right to self-determination. Kant would support this view as, by the social worker supporting the individual to meet their own self-defined needs, the social worker is promoting good actions that will in turn produce good outcomes for the individual. The social worker needs to recognise that the individual has human rights and freedom to voice their views. Burton (1996) showed that there was a failure to recognise the unequal power dealing between the social worker in control of provision of services and the service user who relies on the services. This therefore would underm ine Beisteks principles of self-determination as, although the service user is voicing their opinion, the social worker is not listening and this could be seen as jeopardising the principles of personalisation and the code of ethics that are imperative. The implementation of The Mental Capacity Act needs to be reviewed to ensure workers are following legislation and ethics. It should not be assumed someone lacks capacity because they have a disability.On the other hand, if the service user didnt have capacity, it could cause conflict between the social worker and the paid carer and/or unpaid carers. If the service user lacks capacity, how would the social worker or the carers be able to assess what was best for the individual? A social worker would have to go on and promote human dignity and well-being as well as empowering the individual. (BASW, 2012). These ethics and values are supported by Beisteks theory. Workers need to treat the service user with respect, be non -judgemental and accept the situation the service user may be in. The social worker therefore would only be able to act upon their assessment which should include the carers views on what is best for the service user. Utilitarianism, an alternative argument, would argue whats the greatest good for the greatest number? What would win the service user more? The social workers views or the carers views? The outcomes need to ensure that the maximum people are happy. The social worker could reach the maximum happiness and reduce conflict by using empowerment. The social worker would respect the needs and preferences of the service user, via the carers and family members as well as recognising their own prejudices to ensure the correct services are offered. The Community Care Act (1990) promotes care in the community and people staying within their own internal, allowing the individual to use their personal budget and have carers to promote independence. There is present to suggest for example, i ndividuals who have fractured a limb, fare better when they recuperate in their own homes. (Pignolo, Keenan and Hebela, 2011).Accommodation is a major concern for many service users (Davis and Wainwright, 1996). One aspect that could cause conflict is the practice of placing young people in young disability units, properties that are specifically designed for people with learning disabilities. Although this could be seen as a solution for people to act and have support, there is a potential conflict as the individual cannot choose where they want to live and may live a infinite from family/friends. If placed in a purpose built establishment, the individuals are classed as being housed by the local authority and therefore do not get to choose alternative locations (Oliver, 1996). The dilemma for the social worker is the need to take the individuals views into account whilst balancing their needs and wants, particularly if the service user lacks the capacity to make the decision.It is unlawful for anyone to sign a tenancy compact on behalf of an individual who lacks capacity. A capacity assessment needs to be undertaken to ensure the service user understands how to maintain that tenancy. In order to proceed, an practise needs to be made to The Court of Protection. This could lead to conflict as the social worker and housing department need to uphold the law, however many families feel they have the right to sign a tenancy for their disabled family member and find it difficult to accept that this is not the case. jibe to BASW (2012), the social worker needs to develop professional relationships with the service user and the family, uphold the reputation and values of the profession as well as recognising diversity and treating the individual as a whole. Utilitarianism would recommend looking at what benefits the whole family, rather than just the service user. Challenges arise when the service user lacks capacity. Using the utilitarian approach, it could be said that the service user shouldnt be given a tenancy as it doesnt promote the greatest good for the greatest number. This view is in conflict with BASW codes of ethics. It could be seen as unethical practice and lead to further conflict. Beistek would support the view of BASW in using the specific value base that service users should be allowed to freely express their feelings, both positive and negative, and the social worker should listen and make a decision in an accepting and non-judgemental way. However, Kant would say that although the consequence of not acquiring a choice in where the service user lives is a negative outcome, the intention of placing them in a home, with other people to socialise is a good moral judgement that is solely benefitting the individual.Another potential conflict could be honest-to-god disabled individuals being forced into care. The Sutherland Report (1999) claimed that older disabled people were being forced into institutional care excessively early due to the lack of alternative care at home. Sixsmith and Sixsmith (2008) provided yard that by 2008 there had been a shift in care provision and that the Personalisation Agenda meant that people were remaining in their home for longer and receiving leave services. However there is a further potential for conflict when fit people, with disabilities, to stay in their homes. Individuals may want to grow old at home but is this possible for people with significantly reduced mobility? legion(predicate) homes are inaccessible to wheelchair users and those with significant mobility impairments (Burns, 2004). There is a Government avoidance whereby disabled people can apply for a disabled preparation grant to have their homes adapted, and certain individuals have to re-pay the Government, therefore the Government is not financing expensive care packages. The role of the social worker would be to negotiate, support and empower the service user to have their needs met in the most appropriate, desired way. According to Kants theory, having a loan is the moral good as people will be able to remain at home for longer, promoting happiness and community care. This would be supported by the values of BASW which states social workers need to treat the service user as a whole and respect their right to self-determination. In contrast to Kants theory, Utilitarianism would consider measure up the consequences of removing the service user from their house and into an adapted and safe environment. I.e. a care home could be seen as an easier option for disabled people to receive care. This view could cause conflict because the social worker is going against the wishes and desires of the service user. Utilitarianism looks at the best outcome for society rather than on an individual level. Therefore, by moving individuals out of the house into the care home may provide maximum happiness for society, although it disregards the individuals views and opinions. This is a cr iticism of the model as many service users could potentially not have their needs met in a manner that is acceptable to them due to the focus being on the benefit to society. This could be particularly true e.g. for people with side of meat as a second language or who follow a religious faith. However, Beistek would agree with Kant in promoting self-determination.A key theme ladder throughout this essay is respect for the individual person as a self determining being. Both Kant and Beistek promote this and therefore appear to be the social philosophical models best tailored towards social work values and ethics. There are clear conflicts between traditional social work and the personalisation agenda for people with disabilities. These conflicts have been reduced with the introduction of HCPC ethics. If the social worker consistently uses these theories whilst working with conflict and challenging service users then the BASW ethics will be maintained and the service users will re ceive the best appropriate service available within Fair access to care criteria.