Introduction
This essay presents a case analysis of Mary, a 19-year-old mother of three, who is experiencing domestic violence from her husband Chris, alongside serious health challenges including cervical cancer and sexually transmitted infections. As a social worker in a Christian organisation that values family unity, I explore the ethical complexities of supporting Mary, who is considering divorce and relocation. The analysis addresses social work ethics and values, innovative approaches to her case, ethical dilemmas, the distinction between ethics and morals, and decision-making frameworks such as deontology and utilitarianism. Furthermore, it considers the contextual impact on ethical practice and transparency with management.
Background
Mary’s circumstances are multifaceted, involving domestic violence, neglect by Chris, and significant health issues. Her consideration of divorce conflicts with the values of the Christian organisation I represent, which prioritises preserving family structures. Additionally, mixed advice from her church friends and a supportive stance from her sister towards Chris add emotional complexity to her decision-making process. As a social worker, my role is to support Mary while navigating these personal, cultural, and organisational tensions.
Social Work Ethics and Values
Social work ethics, as outlined by the British Association of Social Workers (BASW), emphasise respect for human rights, social justice, and the dignity of individuals (BASW, 2014). These values compel me to prioritise Mary’s safety and autonomy, particularly given the violence she faces. However, the organisation’s belief against family separation creates a tension between professional ethics and institutional values. This conflict highlights the importance of balancing individual client needs with broader organisational principles, a challenge often discussed in social work literature (Banks, 2012).
Innovations and Creativity in Supporting Mary
Dealing with Mary requires innovative approaches to ensure her safety while respecting organisational values. For instance, I could facilitate access to domestic violence support services and health care, while also engaging in family mediation to address Chris’s behaviour without immediate separation. Creatively, I might involve community leaders from the church to provide counselling that aligns with faith-based values but prioritises Mary’s wellbeing. Such strategies aim to bridge the gap between personal safety and cultural expectations.
Ethical Dilemmas
The primary ethical dilemma is whether to support Mary’s potential decision to divorce, which contradicts organisational ethos, or to encourage reconciliation at the risk of her safety. Additionally, respecting Mary’s autonomy might conflict with my duty to protect her children, who are also affected by the household dynamics. As Banks (2012) notes, such dilemmas are inherent in social work, requiring careful negotiation of competing priorities.
Ethics versus Morals
Ethics in social work are formal principles guiding professional conduct, such as those in the BASW Code of Ethics, focusing on client welfare and justice (BASW, 2014). Morals, however, are personal beliefs about right and wrong, which for me might include a personal inclination towards family unity influenced by faith. The distinction is critical, as I must ensure that personal morals do not override professional ethical obligations to Mary’s safety.
Transparency with Management
I would inform management about Mary’s situation, including the violence and health challenges, to seek organisational support for interventions like counselling. However, I would not disclose her consideration of divorce immediately, as it might provoke a directive against her wishes. This partial transparency protects Mary’s autonomy while maintaining trust with management, a balance often necessary in faith-based settings (Banks, 2012).
Deontological and Utilitarian Perspectives
A deontologist would focus on duty, arguing that I must adhere to professional ethics by prioritising Mary’s safety and right to self-determination, regardless of outcomes (Kant, as cited in Gray, 2010). Conversely, a utilitarian would consider the greatest good for the majority, potentially advocating for reconciliation to maintain family stability for the children, if safety could be assured (Mill, as cited in Gray, 2010). These contrasting views highlight the complexity of decision-making in this case.
Contextual Impact on Ethical Practice
The context, particularly the Christian organisational framework, significantly shapes ethical practice. It imposes a bias towards family preservation, which might limit open discussions about separation. In response, I would prioritise Mary’s immediate safety through external support services while engaging in dialogue with church leaders to explore faith-compatible solutions. This approach respects the context while addressing her needs.
Conclusion
This case analysis reveals the intricate interplay of social work ethics, organisational values, and personal dilemmas in supporting Mary. While professional ethics demand prioritising her safety and autonomy, the Christian context and mixed social influences complicate interventions. Balancing innovative support with ethical transparency, and considering diverse philosophical approaches like deontology and utilitarianism, is essential. Ultimately, this case underscores the need for social workers to navigate contextual constraints while advocating for vulnerable clients, ensuring both immediate protection and long-term wellbeing.
References
- Banks, S. (2012) Ethics and Values in Social Work. 4th ed. Palgrave Macmillan.
- British Association of Social Workers (BASW). (2014) The Code of Ethics for Social Work. BASW.
- Gray, M. (2010) Moral Sources and Emergent Ethical Theories in Social Work. British Journal of Social Work, 40(6), pp. 1794-1811.
