Reference no: EM13860207

Professional Love?

It is two o'clock in the morning and Maria has just violated both her professional code of ethics and the law. Maria is a foster care counselor and she has just taken Bethany, an eight-year-old foster child, into her home for the evening. The situation is an emergency, but it is not especially uncommon. Bethany's foster parents received a late night call about a dying relative and chose to leave immediately. Bethany is not family, so she needed to be relocated while her foster family is away. Unfortunately, most foster homes are full and the only facility available to take Bethany in the middle of the night is a group home called Interface. Interface is meant for troubled older teens and Maria could not bear to place Bethany there, so she took Bethany home to sleep in her guest bedroom.

It is fairly common for social workers to use their own resources to supplement the services they are able to offer others. Many children of older social workers have stories of sharing their rooms with foster children or of developing family relationships with their parents' clients. Today professional guidelines restrict the sorts of personal relationships social workers develop and generally restrict "dual relationships" such as caseworker and family friend, because the relationships may present a conflict of interest.10 However, when asked, many foster children describe their best caseworkers as those who best connected with them and their families on a personal level.11

Maria rejects many of the modern protections against conflicts of interest as an "idealistic" personal/professional distinction. According to Maria having a personal relationship with some foster children has helped to boost their sense of being loved. Research suggests that children's self-esteem is strongly linked to the sense that they are loved and some have argued that children have a right to be loved.12 Maria has bonded with Bethany and wants to support their relationship. She has taken Bethany to visit Bethany's mother in prison and has comforted her about the death of her father. At this point Maria feels that the right thing to do is to take Bethany home for a decent night's sleep and begin looking for a temporary placement in the morning.

One implication of Maria's decision is that she must lie in her official incident report. Because Maria is not a licensed foster parent, Bethany cannot legally spend the night at her home. Officially Maria reports keeping Bethany in her custody at work overnight while unsuccessfully looking for a placement. For many in the office this report has a clear and unproblematic implied meaning, but some of Maria's colleagues would disapprove if they knew. Some might worry that Maria is getting too close to a client for her own good; others might worry mostly about a detrimental interaction between Maria's twelve-year-old son and eight-year-old Bethany. Finally, some might worry that Maria's behavior, combined with her habit of hugging the children with whom she works and kissing them on the head or cheek, will be misunderstood or potentially resented by the children's parents.

One of the tricks to being successful in college is knowing what the instructor expects.  This handout is designed to help you understand what we are looking for in the critical thinking/application paper so you have the best chance of success.

You MUST begin each section by identifying its title so that the professor knows what he/she is reading. The following are the SEVEN sections of the CTAP and the expectations for each section.

I. Identification

There are three things you do in this section:

1. Give a short summary of the case

2. Identify the central ethical issue to be resolved and explain why it is the focal problem

3. Identify other secondary ethical issues.

II. Research

Find at least three appropriate sources and provide a detailed summary of each article. Each article must be relevant to the content, central and secondary issues in the case.  Only scholarly journal articles will be accepted.  You cannot use newspapers and magazines for this section.

1. Source _________________: (Provide a minimum of half a page of summary and why this article is relevant to the case)

2. Source _________________: (Provide a minimum of half a page of summary and why this article is relevant to the case)

3. Source _________________: (Provide a minimum of half a page of summary and why this article is relevant to the case)

III. Analysis

In this section you do FOUR things:

1. Identify the stakeholders (people and agencies) in the case

2. Identify 3 - 4 options the primary stakeholder can take to resolve the ethical issues

3. It is required that you develop a chart/table like the one shown below on how each option affects the primary and other stakeholders. DO NOT limit your stakeholders to only three. Show all stakeholders identified in the case and other reasonable stakeholders not identified in the case

4. Explain what you have in the chart/table in a narration outside of the table

Stakeholders	Options
	Option #1	Option #2	Option #3	Option #4
Stakeholder #1	What happens to stakeholder #1 if the decision-maker(s) choose option #1	What happens to stakeholder #1 the decision-maker chooses Option #2	What happens to stakeholder #1 if the decision-maker chooses Option #3	What happens to stakeholder #1 if the decision-maker chooses Option #4
Stakeholder #2	What happens to stakeholder #2 if the decision-maker chooses Option #1	What happens to stakeholder #2  if the decision-maker chooses Option #2	What happens to stakeholder #2 if the decision-maker chooses Option #3	What happens to stakeholder #2 if the decision-maker chooses Option #4
Stakeholder #3	What happens to stakeholder #3 if the decision-maker  chooses Option #1	What happens to stakeholder #3 if the decision-maker chooses Option #2	What happens to stakeholder #3 if the decision-maker chooses Option #3	What happens to stakeholder #3 if the decision-maker chooses Option #4

IV. Application

This section carries 30 points and you must do an excellent job in this section.  You are required to identify two theories and apply them to the case, a consequential and a non-consequential theories.

1. Consequential Ethical Theory:

1. Choose Act or Rule Utilitarianism

2. Explain the key components of the theory you chose

3. Identify the application steps of the theory listed in your textbook

4. Use the application steps to apply the theory to the case and select the option that is morally permissible

2. Non-Consequential Ethical Theory:

1.Choose ONE of the following non-consequential theories: Virtue Ethics, Natural Law, Natural Rights, Kantianism (Deontology), or Contractarianism.

2. Explain the key components of the theory you chose

3. Identify the application steps of the theory listed in your textbook

4. Use the application steps to apply the theory to the case and select the option that is morally permissible 

V. Decision Making

Choose the wisest, most ethical option and justify your decision.  This is NOT an opinion. Using your research, analysis of the options and stakeholders and your applications of the ethical theories, laws and rules, select and defend the morally right (or most ethical) resolution to the central ethical issue. Using facts and relevant evidence from your research and analysis, thoroughly explain why you decided this is the best solution.

VI. Evaluation

Identify ONE OPTION that is better than what you considered to be the best decision in Part V and explain why it is a better option.

1. List a NEW OPTION that is different from your best option in Part V and explain why it is perhaps a better option. This new option could be one of the 3 - 4 options you identified in Part III, Analysis, or it could be a totally new option.

VI. Reflection

Explain what you learned from this particular assignment and the critical thinking process.  How could you improve your problem-solving process or your thinking; e.g., focusing on different factors, relying on personal assumptions, utilizing different values/principles, etc. You shouldnot write about what you learned about the scenario itself, just what you have learned from the critical thinking process, and so forth.