When I first learned of Joanne’s situation through reading the case study materials, I felt immediate concern and worry. Knowing that she is not only pregnant but also very young, without family support, and currently homeless, I recognize just how vulnerable and even scary her circumstances must be. My heart goes out to her having to grapple with tremendously tricky decisions like whether to continue the pregnancy or inform the father, all while likely feeling very alone and future unsure. I sympathize with the incredible stress and uncertainty she must have around making choices that will impact the entire trajectory of her life moving forward.
The core of my perspective on the issue to be discussed is empathy, neutrality and clients’ right to self-determination. As for me, all the clients have a right to receive care, and the most important thing is for them to need it. However, I have to admit that the reason for this parent-child relationship approach is my middle-class background and upbringing. It should be the practice of parents instead of just giving their children some support. Perhaps I had some bias that Joanne had or should do something to bring peace to the family or reconcile with her parents, and based on my life experience as a person from a higher class. As a social worker, my role is to remain unbiased, so I have to avoid prejudgments and always look at her positively. My presence is to determine her views and objectives, as providing quality and compassionate care for her during a tough time is essential.
The Social Workers’ Code of Ethics and the Standards of Practice are the foundation for how I interact with patients, coworkers, and the wider community (Canda et al., 2019). The principles of service, dignity, and worth of persons make me give the services and ensure that Joanne is treated with dignity. The guidelines make the trust relationship easier to build, either to remain out of judgment or stimulate independent thinking. I cannot be the judge of her choices; thus, letting her make them on her own based on her understanding and values is what I have to do.
Standard III: Consent is my guiding principle through, which I will obtain voluntarily and negotiate with Joanne before offering her services and sharing information with her if instructed. I will ensure that she has the right to withdraw consent. The burden of respecting her personhood by creating room for her preferences to be as significant as possible and assisting her in finding the appropriate help is mine (Hodge et al., 2019). In these evaluations, too, I have been given a chance to react in a way that is truthful and right to meet the demands of moral principles, which means I abandon my beliefs to ensure Joanne’s needs are met.
While these ethical and professional standards of conduct may be different from one profession to another, they nevertheless represent the best recommendations for me to treat Joanne with respect and dignity and to offer her support in dealing with a period of transition in her life by using a client-centred approach that takes her autonomy into account.
I could face a situation that is between my pro-life views and Joanne’s right to decide the outcome of her pregnancy in this third trimester. Although it is still considered, the Code of Ethics will not allow me to impose my personal views and to respect the client’s values and purpose. Hence, I would have to think carefully and take sides without biases to support Joanne’s decisions.
As a social service worker, I am trained to offer short-term counselling and referrals, link individuals to resources, and serve my clients with practical support within the confines of my office (Gass et al., 2020). I will tell Joane about the solutions for her pregnancy, housing, education and other essential things, and I will try to introduce her to the services she might need. However, I cannot do things for her that require the practice of medicine and clinical procedures. Suppose legal issues, health concerns or other matters not within my scope arise. In that case, I will seek my supervisor’s counsel and refer to professionals such as social workers, health care providers, or lawyers. On the multidisciplinary team, my role will be to ensure that Joanne receives the best possible care with her individual needs in my scope of practice in mind.
To prevent the failure of the client, Joanne is the one who has self-determination, and it can be achieved through ethical standards such as Standard III from the NASW policy documents. Standard III outlines that first and foremost, clients are to give informed, non-coerced consent before any services, sharing of sensitive information referrals or external connections are initiated on their behalf. Additionally, it makes me confirm whether Joanne has any worries or second thoughts about not taking part in counselling, accessing medical care or other elements of the patient empowerment plan. Adherence to Standard III will play a critical role in creating a safe space that allows Joanne to make choices that are agreed upon as possible self-determination. Furthermore, the Code of Integrity also implies that in case of an encounter with an ambiguous complexity, I must react with a truthful position reflecting my strong moral values. In a nutshell, I need to want Joanne’s interests to prevail, even though my own beliefs may dissent.
References
Gass, M. A., Hallows, G., & Russell, K. C. (2020). Adventure therapy: Theory, research, and practice. Routledge.
Canda, E. R., Furman, L. D., & Canda, H. J. (2019). Spiritual diversity in social work practice: The heart of helping. Oxford University Press, USA.
Hodge, J., Montague, K., Hastings, S., & Morrissey, K. (2019, May). Exploring media capture of meaningful experiences to support families living with dementia. In Proceedings of the 2019 chi conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1-14).
write