What is the source of the article? Is it reputable, why or why not?
The source is the Tennessean. I normally suppose that the Tennessean is a reputable source. It is the main paper that most Nashville uses as well.
2. What are the key arguments/supportive points by those who agree with this policy/proposed policy? What research and/or authoritative sources support the key arguments in support of this? Were these sources discussed in the article?
They agree since there were 865 drug-dependent babies born when the bill was introduced and that was 2 years ago. The law is intended to encourage women to seek treatment instead of just putting them in jail.
3. What are the key arguments/supportive points by those who disagree with this policy/proposed …show more content…
Which marginalized populations are or would be impacted by the policy/proposed policy discussed in the article?
Mothers that are using drugs.
5. Which values from the code of ethics speak to this policy/proposed policy?
Service: Social workers’ primary goal is to help people in need and to address social problems. The people that are in need, in this case, are the babies that will have health problems for the rest of their lives.
Social Justice: Social workers challenge social injustice. We need to speak up for the babies that can not speak for themselves
Dignity and worth of the person: Social workers respect the inherent dignity and worth of the person. In this case would be the dignity and the worth of the babies that are being harmed.
6. What are your recommendation on this issue and which values (personal and from the Code of Ethics) inform your opinion? My recommendation is to not let the bill die as the article says but change some of the rules. I believe there should be a time limit to allow the mother to seek treatment. For example She would have until she is 6 months pregnant to seek treatment to avoid incarceration or punitive action if she chooses not to seek treatment she should face punitive action. She was given a chance but choose not to take
The source is the Tennessean. I normally suppose that the Tennessean is a reputable source. It is the main paper that most Nashville uses as well.
2. What are the key arguments/supportive points by those who agree with this policy/proposed policy? What research and/or authoritative sources support the key arguments in support of this? Were these sources discussed in the article?
They agree since there were 865 drug-dependent babies born when the bill was introduced and that was 2 years ago. The law is intended to encourage women to seek treatment instead of just putting them in jail.
3. What are the key arguments/supportive points by those who disagree with this policy/proposed …show more content…
Which marginalized populations are or would be impacted by the policy/proposed policy discussed in the article?
Mothers that are using drugs.
5. Which values from the code of ethics speak to this policy/proposed policy?
Service: Social workers’ primary goal is to help people in need and to address social problems. The people that are in need, in this case, are the babies that will have health problems for the rest of their lives.
Social Justice: Social workers challenge social injustice. We need to speak up for the babies that can not speak for themselves
Dignity and worth of the person: Social workers respect the inherent dignity and worth of the person. In this case would be the dignity and the worth of the babies that are being harmed.
6. What are your recommendation on this issue and which values (personal and from the Code of Ethics) inform your opinion? My recommendation is to not let the bill die as the article says but change some of the rules. I believe there should be a time limit to allow the mother to seek treatment. For example She would have until she is 6 months pregnant to seek treatment to avoid incarceration or punitive action if she chooses not to seek treatment she should face punitive action. She was given a chance but choose not to take