This article was downloaded by: [Shanghai Jiaotong University on:23May2012,At:07:30 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House 37-41 Mortimer Street London W1T 3JH, UK Australian social work Publication details, including instructions for authors and AUSTRALIAN scription information: SOCIAL WORK http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rasw20 There are no Answers, Only Choices: Teaching Ethical Decision Making it Social work Mel GrayE Jill Gibbons School of Social Sciences, University of Newcastle, Newcastle New South wales. Australia Available online: 01 Jun 2007 To cite this article: Mel gray &t Jill Gibbons(2007): There are no Answers, Only Choices: Teaching Ethical Decision Making in Social Work, Australian Social Work, 60: 2, 222-238 Tolinktothisarticlehttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03124070701323840 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Fulltermsandconditionsofusehttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and- conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims proceeding demand,or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising direct/yor indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material
This article was downloaded by: [Shanghai Jiaotong University] On: 23 May 2012, At: 07:30 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Australian Social Work Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rasw20 There are no Answers, Only Choices: Teaching Ethical Decision Making in Social Work Mel Gray a & Jill Gibbons a a School of Social Sciences, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia Available online: 01 Jun 2007 To cite this article: Mel Gray & Jill Gibbons (2007): There are no Answers, Only Choices: Teaching Ethical Decision Making in Social Work, Australian Social Work, 60:2, 222-238 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03124070701323840 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-andconditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material
Australian Social Work V.60,Na.2,June2007,pp222-238 R Routledge There are no answers only choices Teaching Ethical Decision Making in Social work Mel gray Jill Gibbons School of Social Sciences, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, australia Abstract In teaching students about ethical decision making in social work, it is essential that the students are able to recognise the moral implications of their work and develop a deep understanding about ethical issues and their personal responsibility for making ethical hoices. Thus, more than a how to do it"approach is needed and teaching students about values and ethics is an essential thread that runs through our experience-based social work education program. The present paper describes a learning unit that soug to teach students about ethical decision making as a critical thinking process and, in so doing, to integrate students'knowledge and experience of values, ethics, policy, and research in the final year of study. The relationship between values, ethics, policy, research, and social work practice provided an ideal context within which students could learn to integrate their knowledge and experience and apply it directly to their fieldwork practice. The paper ends with our critical reflection on this teaching experience and a critique of decisionism ethical frameworks Keywords: Ethical Decision Making Frameworks; Ethical Decision Making: Teaching Ethics Virtue ethics s not only the transformation of the public consciousness that we are interested in, but it's our own transformation as artists that's just as important. Perhaps a corollary is that community change can't take place unless it's transformative within us. That familiar line- I see the enemy and it is I"means that every prejudice, every misunderstanding that we perceive out in the real world is inside of us,and has to be challenged. (Allan Kaprow, cited in Lacy, 1995, P. 33) "This article was accepted under the editorship of Christine Bigby and Sharon McCallum. Correspondence to: Mel Gray, School of Social Sciences, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia. E-mail: Mel Gray@newcastle.edu.au issN 0312-407X(print)/ISSN 1447-0748(online)@ 2007 Australian Association of Social Workers
There are no Answers, Only Choices: Teaching Ethical Decision Making in Social Work+ Mel Gray & Jill Gibbons School of Social Sciences, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia Abstract In teaching students about ethical decision making in social work, it is essential that the students are able to recognise the moral implications of their work and develop a deep understanding about ethical issues and their personal responsibility for making ethical choices. Thus, more than a ‘‘how to do it’’ approach is needed and teaching students about values and ethics is an essential thread that runs through our experience-based social work education program. The present paper describes a learning unit that sought to teach students about ethical decision making as a critical thinking process and, in so doing, to integrate students’ knowledge and experience of values, ethics, policy, and research in the final year of study. The relationship between values, ethics, policy, research, and social work practice provided an ideal context within which students could learn to integrate their knowledge and experience and apply it directly to their fieldwork practice. The paper ends with our critical reflection on this teaching experience and a critique of decisionist ethical frameworks. Keywords: Ethical Decision Making Frameworks; Ethical Decision Making; Teaching Ethics; Virtue Ethics It’s not only the transformation of the public consciousness that we are interested in, but it’s our own transformation as artists that’s just as important. Perhaps a corollary is that community change can’t take place unless it’s transformative within us. That familiar line*‘‘I see the enemy and it is I’’ means that every prejudice, every misunderstanding that we perceive out in the real world is inside of us, and has to be challenged. (Allan Kaprow, cited in Lacy, 1995, p. 33). + This article was accepted under the editorship of Christine Bigby and Sharon McCallum. Correspondence to: Mel Gray, School of Social Sciences, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia. E-mail: Mel.Gray@newcastle.edu.au ISSN 0312-407X (print)/ISSN 1447-0748 (online) # 2007 Australian Association of Social Workers DOI: 10.1080/03124070701323840 Australian Social Work Vol. 60, No. 2, June 2007, pp. 222238 Downloaded by [Shanghai Jiaotong University] at 07:30 23 May 2012
In the social work literature, ethical guidelines embodied in codes of ethics are said to provide the guidance needed when ethical dilemmas arise(Banks, 2001: Congress, 1999; Hugman Smith, 1995; Loewenberg, Dolgoff Harrington, 2000; Reamer, 1999; Rhodes, 1986; Rothman, 1998). However, this is only the tip of the iceberg, because ethical guidelines do not guarantee ethical social work practice (Gray, 1995; Rhodes, 1992). Social work education programs want to graduate students who take morality seriously, who take responsibility for moral action, who can demonstrate their commitment to ethical practice, and who have the awareness to recognise, and the expertise to work through, complex ethical problems. Field education placements provide rich and valuable experience on which to draw, as well as opportunities for direct application of new learning(Plath, 2004) A common purpose in social work is to teach students how to solve problems by c≥zom developing as full an understanding of the situation as possible through listening to the client's story, by helping clients to consider possible options for problem solving and anticipate the possible consequences of each option, and by enabling clients to choose a solution that best suits their needs and interests and those of others lved. However, we need to be careful not to overemphasise the rational aspects of ecision making to the detriment of other ways of knowing and gaining understanding. If we want to develop creative, imaginative practitioners, we need to avoid what Dreyfus and Dreyfus(1986)refer to as the Hamlet model of decision making: the detached, deliberate, and sometimes agonising selection among alternatives. This overemphasis on rational problem solving or decision making leads to the situation where students, and practitioners, want to be told how to do things wherein they are happy only when they are being given a well-defined structure within which to work. Although not overlooking the importance of the technological or skill dimensions of social work, we believe that an overemphasis on technical skills and models discourages students from thinking creatively By encouraging students to reflect on their values and commitments as well as their intuition and emotions, we lead them to exciting and perplexing discoveries about themselves and others Although rational decision making is important, ethical practice requires us to go beyond formulaic responses to become intuitive decision makers who know from experience that it is impossible to generate a complete list of options and to anticipate their consequences(Dreyfus Dreyfus, 1986). Essentially, problem solving is an interactional or dialogical process wherein discoveries are made. Thus, we also need to encourage students to respond intuitively and to reflect on the validity of their intuitions, as well as to draw on their experience and to incorporate situational and intuitive understanding into their reasoning processes More than this, we need to teach students to reflect on the way in which their reasoning, actions, and decisions are affected by their values, because without values the helping process becomes a rational-technical endeavor(Gray Askeland, 2002); without an understanding of the complexity and uncertainty of the helping situation, the"practical, problem solving perspectives of professional helpers may only prolong the false hope . that there is one rational solution to any problem"(Goldstein
In the social work literature, ethical guidelines embodied in codes of ethics are said to provide the guidance needed when ethical dilemmas arise (Banks, 2001; Congress, 1999; Hugman & Smith, 1995; Loewenberg, Dolgoff & Harrington, 2000; Reamer, 1999; Rhodes, 1986; Rothman, 1998). However, this is only the tip of the iceberg, because ethical guidelines do not guarantee ethical social work practice (Gray, 1995; Rhodes, 1992). Social work education programs want to graduate students who take morality seriously, who take responsibility for moral action, who can demonstrate their commitment to ethical practice, and who have the awareness to recognise, and the expertise to work through, complex ethical problems. Field education placements provide rich and valuable experience on which to draw, as well as opportunities for direct application of new learning (Plath, 2004). A common purpose in social work is to teach students how to solve problems by developing as full an understanding of the situation as possible through listening to the client’s story, by helping clients to consider possible options for problem solving and anticipate the possible consequences of each option, and by enabling clients to choose a solution that best suits their needs and interests, and those of others involved. However, we need to be careful not to overemphasise the rational aspects of ethical decision making to the detriment of other ways of knowing and gaining understanding. If we want to develop creative, imaginative practitioners, we need to avoid what Dreyfus and Dreyfus (1986) refer to as the Hamlet model of decision making: the detached, deliberate, and sometimes agonising selection among alternatives. This overemphasis on rational problem solving or decision making leads to the situation where students, and practitioners, want to be told how to do things wherein they are happy only when they are being given a well-defined structure within which to work. Although not overlooking the importance of the technological or skill dimensions of social work, we believe that an overemphasis on technical skills and models discourages students from thinking creatively. By encouraging students to reflect on their values and commitments, as well as their intuition and emotions, we lead them to exciting and perplexing discoveries about themselves and others. Although rational decision making is important, ethical practice requires us to go beyond formulaic responses to become intuitive decision makers who know from experience that it is impossible to generate a complete list of options and to anticipate their consequences (Dreyfus & Dreyfus, 1986). Essentially, problem solving is an interactional or dialogical process wherein discoveries are made. Thus, we also need to encourage students to respond intuitively and to reflect on the validity of their intuitions, as well as to draw on their experience and to incorporate situational and intuitive understanding into their reasoning processes. More than this, we need to teach students to reflect on the way in which their reasoning, actions, and decisions are affected by their values, because without values the helping process becomes a rationaltechnical endeavor (Gray & Askeland, 2002); without an understanding of the complexity and uncertainty of the helping situation, the ‘‘practical, problem solving perspectives of professional helpers may only prolong the false hope ... that there is one rational solution to any problem’’ (Goldstein, Australian Social Work 223 Downloaded by [Shanghai Jiaotong University] at 07:30 23 May 2012
224 M. Gray e J. Gibbons 1987, P. 184). When values are factored into the equation, a richness and complexity is added and students begin to understand that moral conflicts, by their very nature, defy"coherent explanations or plausible solutions"(Goldstein, 1987, p. 182) Combined with the ambiguity and uncertainty of human experience, helping mes centered on the critical choices that need to be made . [and our ation and responsibility to others"(Goldstein, 1987, P. 181; see also McBeath Web,2002) For students to appreciate the complexity of moral issues, it is necessary for them be able to accept and deal with uncertainty and ambiguity, and the absence of cookbook solutions, and to learn that when moral conflicts or ethical dilemmas arise, they can only be resolved through dialogue and a process of moral reasoning, where existing knowledge, theory, skills, values, and ethical guidelines are brought together to inform the decision making process. As Allen(1993)observed, moral decisions are made through active dialogue"(p. 46). She went so far as to say that it was the ethical responsibility of the clinician to behave in ways that maintain the dialogue and foster an atmosphere of respect for a multiplicity of views"(p. 38 ). To do this, students need to understand the role that their own values and beliefs play in this dialogue and the way in which they contribute to meaning-making around clients and their problems"(p. 39). They need to recognise too that judgments, assessments, or diagnoses are meanings and represent the values and cultural and gender biases of the dominant voices of the therapy world"(p. 40), as well as their own. They also need an understanding of the broader context in which the dilemmas arise and those affected by them. Thus, we have an ethical responsibility to extend our curiosity to the web of connectedness manifested in how clients perceive themselves, their lives, their problems, and their possibilities"(Allen, 1993, p. 47) This is why, when students are at the highest level of their learning in working with people, we also engage them in practising and reflecting on their ethical decision making, as well as their responsibilities to build knowledge and be accountable hrough social work research, and to participate in policy development and evaluation through policy practice Ethical Decision Making The Australian Association of Social Workers(AASW) Code of Ethics(AASw, 1999, Section 5.1) defines ethical decision making as a"process of critical reflection, evaluation and judgment through which a practitioner resolves ethical issues, problems and dilemmas"(p. 22). These can occur inter alia(a) when peoples interests conflict with one another, (b) when there is conflict between the workers professional values and those of the employing organisation and wider society, (c) when resources do not match client needs, and(d) when system demands for efficiency and outcome conflict with the workers' ethical responsibilities. There are many ethical decision making models in the social work literature, most of which follow a rational, problem solving framework, as mentioned previously (e.g
1987, p. 184). When values are factored into the equation, a richness and complexity is added and students begin to understand that moral conflicts, by their very nature, defy ‘‘coherent explanations or plausible solutions’’ (Goldstein, 1987, p. 182). Combined with the ambiguity and uncertainty of human experience, helping becomes centered on the ‘‘critical choices that need to be made ... [and our] obligation and responsibility to others’’ (Goldstein, 1987, p. 181; see also McBeath & Webb, 2002). For students to appreciate the complexity of moral issues, it is necessary for them to be able to accept and deal with uncertainty and ambiguity, and the absence of cookbook solutions, and to learn that when moral conflicts or ethical dilemmas arise, they can only be resolved through dialogue and a process of moral reasoning, where existing knowledge, theory, skills, values, and ethical guidelines are brought together to inform the decision making process. As Allen (1993) observed, ‘‘moral decisions are made through active dialogue’’ (p. 46). She went so far as to say that it was ‘‘the ethical responsibility of the clinician to behave in ways that maintain the dialogue and foster an atmosphere of respect for a multiplicity of views’’ (p. 38). To do this, students need to understand the role that their own values and beliefs play in this dialogue and the way in which they ‘‘contribute to meaning-making around clients and their problems’’ (p. 39). They need to recognise too that judgments, assessments, or ‘‘diagnoses are meanings and represent the values and cultural and gender biases of the dominant voices of the therapy world’’ (p. 40), as well as their own. They also need an understanding of the broader context in which the dilemmas arise and those affected by them. Thus, we have an ethical responsibility to extend our ‘‘curiosity to the web of connectedness manifested in how clients perceive themselves, their lives, their problems, and their possibilities’’ (Allen, 1993, p. 47). This is why, when students are at the highest level of their learning in working with people, we also engage them in practising and reflecting on their ethical decision making, as well as their responsibilities to build knowledge and be accountable through social work research, and to participate in policy development and evaluation through policy practice. Ethical Decision Making The Australian Association of Social Workers (AASW) Code of Ethics (AASW, 1999, Section 5.1) defines ethical decision making as a ‘‘process of critical reflection, evaluation and judgment through which a practitioner resolves ethical issues, problems and dilemmas’’ (p. 22). These can occur inter alia (a) when people’s interests conflict with one another, (b) when there is conflict between the worker’s professional values and those of the employing organisation and wider society, (c) when resources do not match client needs, and (d) when system demands for efficiency and outcome conflict with the workers’ ethical responsibilities. There are many ethical decision making models in the social work literature, most of which follow a rational, problem solving framework, as mentioned previously (e.g., 224 M. Gray & J. Gibbons Downloaded by [Shanghai Jiaotong University] at 07:30 23 May 2012
Congress, 1999; Hill, Glaser Harden, 1995; Loewenberg, Dolgoff Harrington 2000; Mattison, 2000; Robinson Reeser, 2000; Rothman, 1998 ). Within these models students, and practitioners, are(a) entreated to review the relevant code of ethics and know the applicable laws and regulations(Corey, Corey Callanan, 2003);(b) to reflect on their ethical preferences, isolate the ethical and technical aspects of the situation, and reflect on their choice of action(Mattison, 2000); (c)to Examine relevant personal, societal, agency, client and professional values, Think about what ethical standard of the relevant Code of Ethics applies to the situation, as well as about relevant laws and case decisions, Hypothesise about possible consequences of different decisions, Identify who will benefit and who will be harmed in view of social works commitment to the most vulnerable, and Consult with supervisor and colleagues about the most ethical choice( Congress's(1999) ETHIC Decision Making Model Chenoweth and McAuliffe(2005)observed that despite some merit in available ethical decision making frameworks, ethical dilemmas often masquerade as other things. In reality, problem solving is never a structured linear process of decision making: people are not always available for consultation and may not always give good advice; clients often do not understand the situation they are in; there is always the potential for unintended or unforeseen outcomes; and it may not always be possible to get all sides of the story. In reality, all we can do is work ith the incomplete information we have and do the best that we can. although we are expected to justify our actions drawing on available research(evidence), including agency policy and relevant ethical codes, ultimately ethical decisions are subjective and relational and depend very much on the situations in which they occur. They are complex. There are no right answers, only choices, and we are responsible for, and have to be able to live with, the decision or choices we make. Chenoweth and Mcauliffe(2005)believe that it is helpful to have a support network with whom to discuss ethical issues and reflection is critical. Every challenge creates opportunities for learning and for ones practice Learning Unit on Ethical Decision Making With this theoretical framework as a backdrop, the learning unit on ethical decision making will now be presented in the form that it is given to students However, before doing so, we want to draw attention to two important aspects of our pedagogical approach. First, we teach experientially through the medium of small groups, which Reisch and Lowe(2000)referred to as being especially useful for teaching material on ethics"(p. 27), and, second, students analyse an ethical dilemma drawn from their field experience, which, like Reisch and Lowe(2000) we have found to be a particularly useful teaching tool"(p. 28). The goals of the earning unit are to
Congress, 1999; Hill, Glaser & Harden, 1995; Loewenberg, Dolgoff & Harrington, 2000; Mattison, 2000; Robinson & Reeser, 2000; Rothman, 1998). Within these models students, and practitioners, are (a) entreated to review the relevant code of ethics and know the applicable laws and regulations (Corey, Corey & Callanan, 2003); (b) to reflect on their ethical preferences, isolate the ethical and technical aspects of the situation, and reflect on their choice of action (Mattison, 2000); (c) to Examine relevant personal, societal, agency, client and professional values, Think about what ethical standard of the relevant Code of Ethics applies to the situation, as well as about relevant laws and case decisions, Hypothesise about possible consequences of different decisions, Identify who will benefit and who will be harmed in view of social works commitment to the most vulnerable, and Consult with supervisor and colleagues about the most ethical choice (Congress’s (1999) ETHIC Decision Making Model). Chenoweth and McAuliffe (2005) observed that despite some merit in available ethical decision making frameworks, ethical dilemmas often masquerade as other things. In reality, problem solving is never a structured linear process of decision making; people are not always available for consultation and may not always give good advice; clients often do not understand the situation they are in; there is always the potential for unintended or unforeseen outcomes; and it may not always be possible to get all sides of the story. In reality, all we can do is work with the incomplete information we have and do the best that we can. Although we are expected to justify our actions drawing on available knowledge and research (evidence), including agency policy and relevant ethical codes, ultimately ethical decisions are subjective and relational and depend very much on the situations in which they occur. They are complex. There are no right answers, only choices, and we are responsible for, and have to be able to live with, the decision or choices we make. Chenoweth and McAuliffe (2005) believe that it is helpful to have a support network with whom to discuss ethical issues and reflection is critical. Every challenge creates opportunities for learning and for refining one’s practice. Learning Unit on Ethical Decision Making With this theoretical framework as a backdrop, the learning unit on ethical decision making will now be presented in the form that it is given to students. However, before doing so, we want to draw attention to two important aspects of our pedagogical approach. First, we teach experientially through the medium of small groups, which Reisch and Lowe (2000) referred to as being ‘‘especially useful for teaching material on ethics’’ (p. 27), and, second, students analyse an ethical dilemma drawn from their field experience, which, like Reisch and Lowe (2000), we have found to be ‘‘a particularly useful teaching tool’’ (p. 28). The goals of the learning unit are to: Australian Social Work 225 Downloaded by [Shanghai Jiaotong University] at 07:30 23 May 2012