Conclusion
Ethics and Values
There are a few ethical issues in regards to Maci and her family; the first ethical dilemma is the right to self-determination. Currently, it is the parents’ decision to vaccinate their child. However, based on section 1.02 in the NASW Code of Ethics it is acceptable for the social worker to limit the clients’ right to self-determination when the impact causes a serious risk (National Association of Social Workers, 1999). For this case, initially, there would be an ethical issue with letting Miranda have the right to self-determination. However, as the situation has progressed and the social worker is aware of how long the medical neglect has been happening, it would be the social workers responsibility to limit her right to self-determination because she is purposefully medically neglecting her child, which is causing various concerns developmentally and socially.
The next ethical dilemma is if the social worker should inform the family that she is making a report with Child Protective Services (CPS). Based on multiple class discussions the response varies. Some believe that if the social worker tells the client that she is calling CPS this will …show more content…
This is an ethical dilemma because there is a chance that when the social worker calls CPS they will remove Maci and neither parent will have full custody. Therefore, it is mandatory that the social worker reports to CPS; however, it is also essential for the social worker to help the family thrive and stay together, if beneficial for everyone. The NASW Code of Ethics (1999) described the importance of human relationships as the “Social workers seek to strengthen relationships among people in a purposeful effort to promote, restore, maintain, and enhance the well-being of individuals, families, [and] social groups...” Overall, this family needs the outside assistance from a social worker to help restore and maintain their
Ethics and Values
There are a few ethical issues in regards to Maci and her family; the first ethical dilemma is the right to self-determination. Currently, it is the parents’ decision to vaccinate their child. However, based on section 1.02 in the NASW Code of Ethics it is acceptable for the social worker to limit the clients’ right to self-determination when the impact causes a serious risk (National Association of Social Workers, 1999). For this case, initially, there would be an ethical issue with letting Miranda have the right to self-determination. However, as the situation has progressed and the social worker is aware of how long the medical neglect has been happening, it would be the social workers responsibility to limit her right to self-determination because she is purposefully medically neglecting her child, which is causing various concerns developmentally and socially.
The next ethical dilemma is if the social worker should inform the family that she is making a report with Child Protective Services (CPS). Based on multiple class discussions the response varies. Some believe that if the social worker tells the client that she is calling CPS this will …show more content…
This is an ethical dilemma because there is a chance that when the social worker calls CPS they will remove Maci and neither parent will have full custody. Therefore, it is mandatory that the social worker reports to CPS; however, it is also essential for the social worker to help the family thrive and stay together, if beneficial for everyone. The NASW Code of Ethics (1999) described the importance of human relationships as the “Social workers seek to strengthen relationships among people in a purposeful effort to promote, restore, maintain, and enhance the well-being of individuals, families, [and] social groups...” Overall, this family needs the outside assistance from a social worker to help restore and maintain their