SWK 450 Social Work Ethics and Values II, Spring, 2001

Instructor: Stephen M. Marson, Ph.D.
Office Hours: Monday 8:00; Tuesday 9:30; Wednesday 11:00 PM; Thursday 9:30; Friday 8:00
Prerequisites: SWK 281

Objectives

  1. To clarify one's own personal value system and that of professional social work; to explore the interrelationships and tensions between personal, professional and societal values.
  2. To increase an awareness of contemporary social work issues (i.e., changes in legal and agency policy) and their ethical implications.
  3. To enhance the development of a commitment to generalist social work practice and to practice  social work within the professions value and ethical guidelines.
  4. To acquire and demonstrate skill and competence in ethical analysis in regard to policy formulation in  the US and in our local rural area.
  5. To increase and understanding of what constitutes ethical practice in relationship to a diverse client population, with particular consideration in working with populations at risk.
  6. To critically social and economic justice issues within the context of the ethical delivery of human services.
  7. To develop skills for critically examining research in order to increase ethical social work professional development.
Course Outline and Corresponding Assignments
  • Students will review: NASW Code of Ethics, CASW Code of Ethics, UNCP Student Honor Code, and Center for Applied Ethics
  • Based on a class and group discussions of our readings,  students will have an intellectual basis for examining their personal value system and how this related to values of the profession.  In addition, students will be able to explore the  interrelationship and tensions between personal, professional and societal values.
  • Students will become aware of contemporary social work practice and the ethical implications for the rural environment by class and group discussion of the following readings:
  • Kagle, J. D. and Giebelhausen, P. N. (1994). Dual relationships and professional boundaries, Social Work, 39(2): 213-220.
  • Miller, P. J. (1994). Dual relationships in rural practice. Human Services in the Rural Environment, 18 (2): 4-7.
  • Students continue to develop their commitment to generalist social work practice within the professions value and ethical guidelines.  Readings for class and group discussion include:
  • Summers, A. B., (1989). The meaning of informed consent in social work, Social Thought, 15 (3/4): 128-140.
  • Regehr, C. and Antle, B. (1997). Coercive influences: Informed consent  in court-mandated social work practice, Social Work, 42 (3): 300-306.
  • Rock, B. and Congress, E. (1999). The new confidentiality for the 21st century in a managed care envirnment. Social Work, 44  (3): 253-262.
  • Policy analysis and formulation must occur within an ethical context.  We examine policy the US and in our local rural area.  The following readings give us a point to begin our discussion:
  • Strom-Gottfried, K. (1998). Is 'ethical managed care' an oxymoron, Families In Society, 79 (3): 297-307.
  • Marson, S. M. (2000). Internet ethics. The New Social Worker, 7(3), 19-20.
  • Through the use of readings and class discussion, students will increase and understanding of what constitutes ethical practice in relationship to a diverse client population, with particular consideration in working with populations at risk.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1991). AIDS, social work, and the duty to protect, Social Work, 36 (1): 56-60.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1992). The impaired social worker, Social Work, 37 (2): 165-170.
  • By class/group discussion and readings, students will critically examine research and understand its relationship to ethical social work professional development.
  • Conrad, A. P. (1989). Developing an ethics review process in a social service agency, Social Thought, 15 (3/4): 102-115.
  • Jayaratne, S., Croxton, T., and Mattison, D. (1997). Social work professional standards: An exploratory study, Social Work, 42 (2): 187-199.
    • Attendance/Participation
        Professional social work practice demands a high degree of personal commitment, engagement, and use of self.   To begin to achieve this end, students are expected to attend every class and constructively participate in class discussions and activities.  Any absence from class will result in loss of points.  Students are encouraged to be on time for class.  Any student entering the classroom after role has been taken will write their name on the board so the instructor can mark them present with a T (tardy).  Each tardy is worth half and absence and will result in loss of points also.

    GRADING
    10% for each written/presentation (60% total)
    20% Attendance/Participation
    20% Final Exam

    GRADING SCALE

    A    =    100-92  B    =    86-82 C    =    76-72 D    =    66-62 
    A-   =    91-90  B-   =    81-80 C-   =    71-70 D-  =    61-60
    B+   =    89-87 C+   =    79-77  D+  =    69-67 F    =    59-0 

    FINAL EXAM: Monday May 7, 2001

    Course Materials

  • NASW Code of Ethics.
  • CASW Code of Ethics
  • UNCP Student Honor Code
  • Center for Applied Ethics

    •  

     
     




    Resources

    Abortion Poverty
    Death Penalty Race and Ethncity
    Euthanasia Sexual Orientation
    Gender and Sexism World Hunger

    Giving and Taking Help: The practice of social work includes two important concepts: "process" and "outcome."  Outcome is the degree of success in achieving a goal. Process includes the hard work and self-discipline a social worker employs in achieving the desired outcome. The social work faculty feel that the "process" is as significant as the "outcome." When one student assists another by sharing projects, term papers, book reports, reactions papers and other assignments, the benefits of the "process" are usurped. The student who recycles the assignment is denied the opportunity to enhance his/her self-discipline and work habits. Simply stated, Donut share your work with other students. The social work faculty considers such behavior as cheating, a violation of the NASW Code of Ethics and a violation of the Student Honor Code.
    Plagiarism: Two types of student plagiarize: 1) Students who do not know the meaning of
    plagiarism; 2) Students who cheat. The Social Work Program can not permit either type of student to continue in the program. As a result of successfully completing CMA 105 and CMA 106, students are expected to understand the meaning of plagiarism and to use the APA citation style. All students enrolled in SWK courses are required to use the APA citation style. Since the APA style is taught in CMA 105-106, anyone caught plagiarizing or not using APA will automatically receive an F. APA manuals can be purchased in the bookstore. There is a copy on closed reserve in the library.
    Students with Disabilities: Students with disabilities who believe they require reasonable accommodation in order to meet the requirements of the course should discuss this situation with the professor as early in the semester as possible.

    Reference Bibliography

  • Abramson, M. (1988). The autonomy-paternalism dilemma in social work practice, Social Casework, 66 (7): 387-393.
  • Abramson, M. (1996). Reflections on knowing oneself ethically: Toward a framework for social work practice, Families in Society, 77 (4):195-201.
  • Alexander, R., Jr. (1997). Social workers and privileged communication in the federal legal system, Social Work, 42  (4): 387-391.
  • Barker, R.L. and Branson, D.M., (1997). Forensic Social Work. Binghamton, NY: Haworth,
  • Bullis, R.K., (1995). Clinical Social Worker Misconduct. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
  • Conrad, A. P. (1989). Developing an ethics review process in a social service agency, Social Thought, 15 (3/4): 102-115.
  • Dean, R. G. and Rhodes, M. L. (1992). Ethical-clinical tensions in clinical practice, Social Work, 39 (2): 128-132.
  • Dickson, D. T. (1998). Confidentiality and Privacy in Social Work. New York: Free Press.
  • Gambrill, E. and Pruger, R. (1997). Controversial Issues in Social Work: Ethics, Values, and Obligations. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Goldstein, H., (1998). Education for Ethical Dilemmas in Social Work Practice, Families In Society, 79 (3): 241-253.
  • Houston-Vega, M., Nuehring, E. M. (1997). Prudent Practice: A Guide for Managing Malpractice Risk. Washington, D.C.: NASW Press.
  • Jayaratne, S., Croxton, T., and Mattison, D. (1997). Social work professional standards: An exploratory study, Social Work, 42 (2): 187-199.
  • Kagle, J. D. and Giebelhausen, P. N. (1994). Dual relationships and professional boundaries, Social Work, 39 (2):  213-220.
  • Kopels, S. and Kagle, J. D. (1993). Do social workers have a duty to warn? Social Service Review, 67 (1): 101-126.
  • Linzer, N. (1998). Resolving Ethical Dilemmas in Social Work Practice. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Loewenberg, F. and Dolgoff, R. (1996). Ethical Decisions for Social Work Practice, 5th ed. Itasca, IL: F.E. Peacock.
  • McGowan, B. G., (1995). Values and ethics, in C. H. Meyer and M. A.Mattaini. (eds) The Foundations of Social Work Practice. Washington, DC: NASW Press.
  • Madden, R.G. (1998). Legal issues in social work, counseling, and mental  health. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
  • Manning, S. S. (1997). The social worker as moral citizen: Ethics in action, Social Work, 42 (3): 223-230.
  • Marson, S. M. (2000). Internet ethics. The New Social Worker, 7(3), 19-20.
  • Marson, S.M. & Brackin, S. (2000). Ethical interaction in cyberspace for social work practice. Advances in Social Work, 1 (1), 27-42.
  • Miller, P. J. (1994). Dual relationships in rural practice. Human Services in the Rural Environment, 18 (2): 4-7.
  • National Association of Social Workers, (1996). NASW Code of Ethics. Washington, DC: Author.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1999). Social Work Values and Ethics (2nd ed.). New York:  Columbia University Press.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1998). Ethical Standards in Social Work: A Critical Review of the NASW Code of Ethics.Washington, DC: NASW Press.
  • Reamer, F. G., (1994). Social Work Malpractice and Liability: Strategies for Prevention. New York: Columbia University Press, 1994.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1990). Ethical Dilemmas in Social Service, 2nd ed. New York: Columbia University Press.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1993) The Philosophical Foundations of Social Work. New York: Columbia University Press.
  • Reamer, F. G., (1998) Social work, in Encyclopedia of Applied Ethics,  vol. 4 (pp. 169-180). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1997). Ethical standards in social work: The NASW code of  ethics, in Encyclopedia of Social Work, 19th ed. Supp. (pp. 113-123). Washington, DC: NASW Press.
  • Reamer, F. G., (1997). Ethical Issues for Social Work Practice, in M. Reisch and E. Gambrill, eds., Social Work in  the 21st Century (pp. 340-349). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Pine Forge/Sage.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1997). Managing Ethics Under Managed Care. Families in  Society, 78 (1): 96-101.
  • Reamer, F. G., (1995). Ethics and values. In Encyclopedia of Social Work, 19th ed. (pp. 893-902). Washington, D.C.: National Association of  Social Workers.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1995). Ethics consultation in social work. Social  Thought, 18 (1): 3-16.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1995). Malpractice claims against social workers: First  facts, Social Work, 40 (5): 595-601.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1994). Social work values and ethics, in F. G. Reamer, ed., The Foundations of Social Work  Knowledge, pp. 195-230. New York:  Columbia University Press.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1993). Liability issues in social work administration, Administration in Social Work, 17 (4): 11-25.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1994). AIDS and social work: The ethics and civil liberties agenda, Social Work, 38 (4): 412-8.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1992). Social work and the public good: Calling or career? in P. Nelson Reid and Philip Popple, eds.,  The Moral Purposes of Social Work, pp. 11-33. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1992). The impaired social worker, Social Work, 37 (2): 165-170.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1991). AIDS, social work, and the duty to protect, Social Work, 36 (1): 56-60.
  • Reamer, F. G. (1985). The emergence of bioethics in social work, Health and Social Work, 10 (4): 271-281.
  • Reamer, F. G., (1983). The free will-determinism debate and social work, Social Service Review, 57 (4): 626-644.
  • Regehr, C. and Antle, B. (1997). Coercive influences: Informed consent  in court-mandated social work practice, Social Work, 42 (3): 300-306.
  • Reid, P. N. and Popple, P. (1992). The Moral Purposes of Social Work. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
  • Rhodes, M. L. (1992). Social work challenges: The boundaries of ethics, Families In Society, 73 (1): 40-47.
  • Rock, B. and Congress, E. (1999). The new confidentiality for the 21st century in a managed care envirnment. Social Work, 44  (3): 253-262.
  • Strom-Gottfried, K. (1998). Is 'ethical managed care' an oxymoron, Families In Society, 79 (3): 297-307.
  • Summers, A. B., (1989). The meaning of informed consent in social work, Social Thought, 15 (3/4): 128-140.
  • Wilson, S. J. (1976). Confidentiality in Social Work. New York: Free Press.

    •